MASTER  NEGATIVE 

NO.  93-81283- 


MICROFILMED  1993 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Titie  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  malcing  of  photocopies  or 
other  reproductions  of  copyrighted  material. 

Under  certain  conditions  specified  in  the  law,  libraries  and 
archives  are  authorized  to  furnish  a  photocopy  or  other 
reproduction.  One  of  these  specified  conditions  is  that  the 
photocopy  or  other  reproduction  is  not  to  be  "used  for  any 
purpose  other  than  private  study,  scholarship,  or 
research."  If  a  user  makes  a  request  for,  or  later  uses,  a 
photocopy  or  reproduction  for  purposes  in  excess  of  "fair 
use,"  that  user  may  be  liable  for  copyright  infringement. 

This  institution  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to  accept  a 
copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


A  UTHOR: 


RAMMOHUN  ROY,  RAJA 


TITLE: 


THE  PRECEPTS  OF 

JESUSTHE  GUIDE  TO 


PLACE: 


BOSTON 


DA  TE: 


1828 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARGFT 


Master  Negative  # 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


1239 
^R14 


^■pvpm 


**.* 


Rammohun  Rov 

j^aTnflTTiQhnnft  Rftyft^  raja,   1772?-1833. 

Second  appeal  to  the  Christian  public  in  defence  ' 

of  The^Precepts  of  Jesus"!  By  Rammohun  Roy.  From  the 

London  edition.  Boston,  Christian  register  office,  * 

1828.  j 

p.  131-318,  25  cm.  (in  his  The  precepts  of  Jesus.l 
1828.) 


u 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


REDUCTION     RATIO: JL 


FILM     SIZE: ^^^^ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA    £5"  IB     HB 

DATE     FILMED: lQ-LJz^Z^A INITIALS      n  ^- ^ 


^ 


FILMED  BY:    RESEARCH  PUBLIC ATTONS  TNC  WOOnBRinnT.  TT 


c 


Association  for  Information  and  Image  Management 

nOOWayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 


iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 


4 

liiiilii 


liiiiliiiil 


TTT 


TTT 


^ 


5        6 

iliiiiliiiilini 


7        8         9 

iiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 


T 


T 


T 


10 


I  1  I 


n        12       13       14 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 


I  T   I 


15    mm 


II 


Inches 


1.0 


1.25 


28 


|32 


la 
■  6J 

IX 


1.4 


25 


22 


2.0 


1.8 


1.6 


MPNUFRCTURED   TO   fillM   STfiNDRRDS 
BY   APPLIED   IMfiGE,     INC. 


u 


'/p-^h 


"'f<IS?-^^'  f^^  ■'    'y'l'p' 


*- 


%m^ 


¥1: 


^1^' 


i4 


# 


i 


i/f^t'. 


^-i>f*^:M. 


.ff.  •  "t 


t', ';'  '-it' 


.%%!:#  ,■■'  *rf 


r'?:-  m-'^^-m  .i 


JW 


t•:«^ 


•:•»-■»«*'■«■. 


->i,^> 


s^'4'-*-iJ'1 


*!.*•■ 


:||| 


*«-s  :m  -.^.^ 


-**^*# 


>A 


i-*- 


#* 


;y^i 


,^ 


,•«.• 


S#'^.n??fe' 


l,*»?l. 


i-4-.' 


Vfe- 


4^4 


"ifjV. 


■  ?;,  .  t"^ ■":»'#■ 


*7-,  *f 


>W^£*-  4" 


ii/^ 


'®^% 


#-1 


"^^^•*<. 


,?»-.- 


•^'i*-'-, 

S'-*^' 


M 


^  ^^.5  jj^^i ; 


t"  ^Ct...,' 


.C'; 


i  > 


'J^, 


««:? 


('*> 


.«! 


ikW  .i.>%i 


f  ^ 


"jiv 


^ 


.■y* 


W  a  * 


h.^' 


i'^." 


Pff 


;"*#  < 


<»  .'',1^  ^-.-' 


j^-  -.i,-< 


i.  >-'*- 


■♦?v^%^ 


^:  ii#»' 


»Mt 


:%v 


%ii 


•  ■ii'4 


^5p 


■iV4' 


It 


\'  ■■-^.* '■-  ^*% 


!!..«       •!,»-. 

-'S'-'^*:  2 


,->t^ 


r.hri 


^ut*'- 


..4fs#i; 


'f/ 


jyi* 


^^i&t' 


■I'tm^ 


s 


tntljeCitpofilmigork 

THE  LIBRARIES 


GIFT 


1 


THE 


> 


PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS, 


THE 


GUIDE  TO  PEACE  AND  HAPPINESS; 


EXTRACTED    FROM    THE 


BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT     ^ 


ASCRIBED  TO  THE  FOUR  EVANGELISTS. 


TO    WHICH    ARE    ADDED, 


THE  FIRST,  SECOND,  AND    FINAL 
APPEAL   TO   THE    CHRISTIAN   PUBLIC, 


ly    REPLY    TO    THE 


OBSERVATIONS  OF  DR.  MARSHMAN^ 


OF    SERAMPORE. 


BY  RAMMOHUN  ROY, 


OF    CALCUT-^A. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION. 


^y*S 


^ 


BOSTON : 
Christian  Register  Office. 

1828. 


fHF. 


PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS, 


fltr 


THE 


GUIDE  TO  PEACE   AND  HAPPINESS: 


EXTRACTED    FROM    THE 


BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


ASCRIBED  TO  THE  FOUR  EVANGELISTS 


TO    WHICH    ARE    ADDED, 


THE  FIRST,  SECOND,  AM)    FINAL 
APPEAL   TO   THE    CHRISTIAN   PUBLIC, 


IX    REPLY    TO    THE 


OBSERVATIONS  OF  DR.  M ARSHMAN. 


OF    SEKAMPORE. 


BY  RAMMOIIUN  ROY, 


OF    CALCIJTI^A. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION 


JX(^-^^1>^^'^A^^-^^^ *^ 


BOSTON 


CnnisTiAN'  Register  Office. 


l*^2s\ 


PREFACE. 


f^y^n. 


l; 


'     « 


The   works  which  are  here  presented  to  th6 
public  cannot  fail  to  excite  much  interest,  from  the 
circumstances  and  character  of  the  author.     He 
has  been  for  several  years  well  known  by  name 
and  reputation,  both  in  India  and  England  ;  but 
lie  has  been  known  only  as  a  learned  and  philan- 
thropic Brahmin,    the  expounder  of  the  religion, 
and  the  reformer  of  the  institutions  of  hisHmdoo 
countrymen.     He  now  appears  as  a  Christian  pro;. 
fessor,  advocate,  and  controversialist.       ^_^ 

Rammohun  Roy  was  born  about  the^r  1780, 
at  Bordouan,  in  the  province   of  bengal.     The 
first  elements  of  his  education  he  received  under 
his  paternal  roof,  whore  he  also  acquired  a  know- 
ledge  of  the  Persian  language.  He  was  afterwards 
sent  to  Patna  to  learn  Arabic  ;  and  here,  through 
the  medium  of  Arabic  translations  of  Aristotle  and 
Euclid,   he  studied   logic  and  the   mathematics. 
When  he  had  completed  these  studies,  he  went  to 
Calcutta,  to  learn  Sanscrit,  the  sacred  language 
of  the    Hindoo  Scriptures  ;  the    knowledge   of 
which  was  indispensable  to  his  caste  and  profes- 
sion as  a  Brahmin.    About  the  year  18G4  or  1 B05, 
he  became  possessed,  by  the  death  of  his  father 
and  of  an  elder  and  younger  brother,  of  the  whole 
of  the  family  property,  which   is  understood  to 
have   been  very  considerable.     He  now  quitted 


IV 


TREFACF.. 


k'HEh'AiJE. 


A,' 


Bordoiian,  and  fixed  his  residence  at  Muurslicda- 
bad,  where  his  ancestors  had  chiclly  lived.  Short- 
ly after  his  settlement  at  this  place,  he  commen- 
ced his  literary  career  by  the  publication  of  a 
work  in  the  Persian  language,  with  a  preface  in 
Arabic,  which  he  entitled,  "  Against  the  Idolatry 
of  allRelijTrions."  The  freedom  with  which  he  ani- 
mad  verted  on  their  respective  systems,  gave  great 
umbrage  both  to  the  Mahomedans  and  the  Hin- 
doos,  and  created  him  so  many  enemies,  that  he 
found  it  necessary  to  remove  to  Calcutta,  where  he 
again  took  up  his  residence  in  tlie  year  1811. 

Two  years  previously  to  this  period,  he  had 
beglin  to  study  the  English  language,  but  he  did 
not  then  ^pply  to  it  with  much  ardour  or  success. 
Beinff  some  yeijrs  subsequently  appointed  Dewan, 
or  chief  native  officer  in  the  collection  of  the  re- 
venues, and  the  duties  of  his  office  affording  him 
frequent    opportunities  of   mixing  with  English 
society,  and  of  reading  English  documents,  he 
applied  to  it  with  increased  attention,  and  very 
soon  qualified  himself  to  speak  and  write  it  with 
considerable  facility,  correctness,  and  elegance. 
He  afterwards  studied  the  Latin,  Greek,  and  He- 
brew languages :  of  his  j)roficiency  in  the  two  last 
of  these  he  has  given  very  decisive  evidence   in 
thetracU  which  are  here  published. 

From  his  first  work,  "  Against  the  Idolatry  of 
all  Religions,"  it  is  evident  tliat  he  had  been  led  at 
an  early  period  of  his  life  to  regard  with  disap- 
probation the  monstrous  and  debasing  system  of 


Idolatry  which  was  embraced  by  his  countrymen. 
A  careful  study   of  the  Sacred  Writings   of  ,he 
Hindoos  had  also  convinced  him,  that  the  prevail- 
ing notions  respecting  the  multiplicity  of  Deities 
and  the  superstitious  devotion  to  the   licentious 
an.l  imiuman  cu..t..ms  connected  with  them,  were 
grounded  upon  an  utter  ignorance,    or  fh.ss  per- 
version of  their  religion.     These  original  records 
appeared    to  him  to   inculcate  a  system   of  pure 
1  leism,   winch  maintained  the  existence  of  one 
^=^ole  God,  infinite  in  his  perfections,  and  eternal  in 
his  duration  ;  and  that  it  required  from  its  profes- 
sors a  mental  rather  than  a  corporeal  worship  ac- 
companied by  strict  an.l  exemplary  virtue.     Ha- 
ving embraced  these  views  of  the  J]i„doo  theolo- 
gy and  morals,  he   became  anxious  to  reform  the 
creed  and  practice  of  his  countrymen,  and  deter- 
mined to  devote  his  talents  an.l  his  fortune  to  this 
important  and  hon..ural.le  nnd.rtakina 

fJv  ^''^"^. '""''""  "'^'"'"»^  '-^  o'omprised  in 
the  Veds  which  are  writings  of  very  high  anti- 
quity. On  account  of  their  great  bulk,  and  the 
obscurity  of  the  style  in  whi.h  they  are  compo- 
sed, Vyas,  a  person  of  great  celebrity  in  Hindoo 
literature,  was  induced,  about  two  thousand  years 
ago  to  draw  up  a  compendi..u.s  abstract  of  the 
whole,  accompanied  with  explanations  of  the 
more  difficult  passages.     This  digest  he  entitled 

Ved.s,    and  it  is  generally  esteemed  as  of  equal 
authority  with   the  original  writings.     This  work 


IV 


PREFACE. 


Bordouan,  and  fixed  his  residence  at  Mourslieda- 
bad,  where  his  ancestors  had  chiefly  lived.  Short- 
ly after  his  settlement  at  this  place,  he  commen- 
ced his  literary  career  by  the  publication  of  a 
work  in  the  Persian  language,  with  a  preface  in 
Arabic,  which  he  entitled,  "  Against  the  Idolatry 
of  all  Religions."  The  freedom  with  which  he  ani- 
madverted on  their  respective  systems,  gave  great 
umbrage  both  to  the  Mahomcdans  and  the  Hin- 
doos,  and  created  him  so  many  enemies,  that  he 
found  it  necessary  to  remove  to  Calcutta,  where  he 
again  took  up  his  residence  in  the  year  1814. 

Two  years  previously  to  this  period,  he  had 
beg!in  to  study  the  English  language,  but  he  did 
not  then  apply  to  it  with  much  ardour  or  success. 
Being  some  years  subsequently  appointed  Dewan, 
or  chief  native  officeHnthe  collection  of  the  re- 
venues, and  the  duties  of  hfs  office  aifTording  him 
frequent  opportunities  of  mixing  with  English 
society,  and  of  reading  English  documents,  he 
applied  to  it  with  increased  attention,  and  very 
soon  qualified  himself  to  speak  and  write  it  with 
considerable  facility,  correctness,  and  elegance. 
He  afterwards  studied  the  Latin,  Greek,  and  He- 
brew languages  :  of  his  proficiency  in  the  two  last 
of  these  he  has  given  very  decisive  evidence  in 
thetracU  which  are  here  published. 

From  his  first  work,  "  Against  the  Idolatry  of 
all  Religions,"  it  is  evident  that  he  had  been  led  at 
an  early  period  of  his  life  to  regard  with  disap- 
probation the  monstrous  and  debasing  system  of 


PREFACE. 


vV 


Idolatry  which  was  embraced  by  his  eountrymeo. 
A  careful  study   of  the  Sacred  Writings   of  the 
Hindoos  had  also  convinced  him,  that  the  prevail- 
ing notions  respecting  the  multiplicity  of  Deities 
and  the  su,.ersli.i„us  devotion  to  the    licentious 
and  inhuman  customs  connected  with  them  were 
grounded  upon  an  utter  ignorance,    or  gross  per- 
version of  their  religion.     Those  original  records 
appeared    to  him  to    inculcate  a  system   of  pure 
Iheism,   which  maintaine.l  the  existence  of  one 
sole  God,  mfinite  in  his  perfections,  and  eternal  in 
his  duration  ;  and  that  it  required  from  its  profes- 
sors a  mental  rather  than  a  corporeal  worship,  ac- 
companied by  strict  and  exemplary  virtue.     Ha- 
ving embraced  these  views  of  the  Hin.loo  theolo- 
gy and  morals,  he   became  anxious  to  reform  the 
creed  and  practice  of  his  countrymen,  an.l  deter- 
mined to  devote  his  talents  and  his  fortune  to  this 
important  and  honourable  undertaking. 

The  body  of  Hin.loo  theology  is  comprised  in 
the   Veds    which  are  writings  of  very  high  anti- 
quity.    On  account  of  their  great  buik,  and  the 
obscurity  of  the  style  in  which  they  are  compo- 
sed, Vyas,  a  person  of  great  celebrity  in  Hindoo 
literature,  was  indu.;ed,  about  two  thousand  years 
ago,  to  draw  up  a  compendious  abstract  of  the 
whole     accompanied    with    explanations  of  the 
more  difficult  passages.     This  digest  he  entitled 
The^  Vedent,"   or     "  The  Resolution    of   the 
Veds,    and   it  is  generally  esteemed   as  of  equa 
authority  with   the  original  writings.     This  work 


r 


¥4 


PREFACE. 


Rammohun  Roy  translated  from  the  Sanscrit  into 
the   Bengalee  an-l  Hiiuloo  languages,  for  the  in- 
formation of  his  countrymen.      He  also  printed 
an  abridgment  of  it  in  the  same  languages,  which 
he  di^itributed  gratuitously  as  extensively  as  cir- 
cumstances  would   admit.      The  abridgment    he 
afterwards  translated  into  English,  in  the  expec- 
tation, as  he  states  in  the   Preface,  of  proving  to 
his    European    friends,  "  that    the    superstitious 
practices  which  deform  the  Hindoo  religion,  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  pure  spirit  of  its  dictates." 
Towards  the  conclusion  of  the  same  preface,  he 
explains  the  reasons  of  his  proceedings,  and  inti- 
mates the  personal  inconveniences  to  which   he 
had  exposed  himself  by  his  benevolent  zeal. 

"  My  constant  reflections,"  Ke  writes,  "on  the 
inconvenient,  or  rather  injurious  rites,  introduced 
by  the  peculiar  practice  of  Hindoo  idolatry,  which, 
more  than  any  other  Pagan  worship,  destroys  the 
texture  of  society,  together  with  compassion  for 
my  countrymen,   have  com[)elled  me  to  use  every 
possible  effi.rt  to  awaken  them  from   their  dream 
of  error  ;  and,  by  making  them  acquainted  with 
the  scriptures,   enable  them  to  contempbte,  with 
true  devotion,  the  unity  and  omnipresence  of  na- 
ture's God.  By  taking  the   path  which  conscience 
and  sincerity  direct,  I,  born   a  Brahmin,  have  ex- 
posed myself  to  the  complainings  and  reproaches 
even  of  some  of  my  relations,   whose  prejudices 
are  strong,  and   whose  temporal  advantage   de- 
pends upon  the  present  system.     But  these,  how 


r 

I 

t 


I 
A 

I 
'I 

.1 


I 


4 


PREFACfcl. 


Vll 


ever  accumulated,  I  can  tranquilly  bear  ;  trusting 
that  a  day  will  arive  when  my  humble  endeavours 
will  be  viewed  with  justice — perhaps  acknow- 
ledged with  gratitude.  At  any  rate,  whatever  men 
may  say,  I  cannot  be  deprived  of  this  consolation  : 
my  motives  are  acceptable  to  that  Being,  who 
beholds  in  secret,  and  compensates  openly."* 

After  the  publication  of  the  Vedant,  Rammo- 
hun Roy  printed  in  Bengnlee  and  in  English  some 
of  the  principal  chapters  of  the  Veds,  "  for  the 
purpose  of  illustrating  and  confirming  the  view 
he  had  taken  of  them."t 

In  the  preface  to  one  of  these  tracts,  the  (Isho- 

*  See  "  Translation  of  an  Abridgment  of  the  Vedant,  or  Resolution 
of  all  the  Veds;  the  most  celebrated  and.  revered  Work  of  Brahmini- 
cal  Theology,  establishing  the  Unity  of  the  Supreme  Being,  and  that 
he  alone  is  the  Object  of  Propitiation  and  Worship.  By  Rammohun 
Roy."     Calcutta,  4to.  1816  ;  8vo.  1818;  London,  4to.  1817. 

t  The  titles  of  these  pamphlets  are  as  follows:  1.  "Translation  of 
the  Cena  Upanishad,  one  of  the  chapters  of  the  Sama  Veda,  accord- 
ing to  the  Gloss  of  the  celebrated  Shancaracharya ;  establishing  the 
Unity  and  Sole  Omnipotence  of  the  Supreme  Being,  and  that  he 
alone  is  the  Object  of  Worship."  Calcutta,  1816.  2.  "  Translation 
of  the  Ishopanishad,  one  of  the  Chapters  of  the  Yajur  Veda;  ac- 
cording to  the  rommentary  of  the  celebrated  Shankar-Acharya  ;  es- 
tablishing the  Unity  and  Incomprehensibility  of  the  Supreme  Being  ; 
and  that  his  Worship  alone  can  lead  to  eternal  Beatitude."  Calcut- 
ta, 1816.  3.  "  Translation  of  the  Moonduk-Opunishud  of  the  Uthur- 
vu-Ved,  according  to  the  Gloss  of  the  celebrated  Shunkura-Charyu." 
Calcutta,  1819.  4.  *' Translation  of  the  Kuth-Opunishud,  of  the 
Ujoor  Ved,  according  to  the  Gloss  of  the  celebrated  Sunkuracharyu." 
1819. 

His  other  publications  on  the  subject  of  Hindoo  Reformation,  con- 
sist of,  1.  "A  Defence  of  Hindoo  Theism,  in  Reply  to  the  attack  of 
an  Advocate  for  Idolatry  at  Madras."  Calcutta,  1817.  2.  A  Se- 
cond Defence  of  the  Monotheistical  System  of  the  Veds,  in  Reply  to 


li 


111 


\ 


Vlll 


PREFACK. 


PHEFACE. 


IX 


panishad,)  after  observing  upon  the  superiority  of 
the  moral  to  the  physical  powers  of  man,  and  inti- 
mating that  sorrow  and  remorse  can  scarcely  fail, 
sooner  or  later,  to  be  the  portion  of  him  who  is  con- 
scious of  having  neglected  opportunities  of  render- 
ing benefit  to  his  fellow  creatures,"  he  again  ad- 
verts to  his  own  case  in  the  following  terms  : 
"  From  considerations  like  these  it  has  been,  that 
I,  (although  born  a  Brahniin,  an<i  instructed  in 
my  youth  in  all  the  principles  of  that  sect,)  being 
thoroughly  convinced  of  the  lamentable  errors  of 
my  countrymen,  have  been  stimulated  to  employ 
every  means  in  my  power  to  improve  their  minds, 
and  lead  them  to  the  knowledge  of  a  purer  system 
of  morality.  Living  constantly  amongst  Hindoos 
of  different  sects  and  professions,  I  have  had  ample 
opportunities  of  observing  the  superstitious  pueri- 
lities into  which  they  have  been  thrown  by  their 
self-interested  guides  ;  who,  in  defiance  of  the 
law  as  well  as  of  common  sense,  have  succeeded 

an  Apology  for  the  present  State  of  Hindoo  Worship.  Calcutta,  1817. 
3.  Translation  of  a  Conference  between  an  Advocate  and  an  Oppo- 
nent of  the  Practice  of  Burning  Widows  Alive,  from  the  original 
Bungla."  1818  4.  '*  A  Second  Conference  between  an  Advocate 
and  an  Opponent  of  the  Practice  of  Burinng  Widows  Alive,  transla- 
ted from  the  original  Bengalee."  Calcutta,  1820.  Dedicated  to  the 
Marchioness  of  Hastings.  5  "  An  Apolojiy  for  the  Pursuit  of  Final 
Beatitude  independently  of  Brahmunical  Observances."  Calcutta, 
1820.  6.  "  Brief  Remarks  regarding  iModern  Encroachments  on  the 
Ancient  Rites  of  Females,  according  to  the  Hindoo  Law  of  Inheri- 
tance. Calcutta,  printed  at  the  Unitarian  Press,  1822."  The  trans- 
lation of  the  "  Vedant,"  and  of  the  "  Cena  Upanishad,"  were  re- 
prinfed  in  London,  in  1817.  A  review  of  some  of  these  pamphlets  is 
rh<?ertpd  in  the  Monthly  Repository,  Vol.  XIV.  pp.  .')61,  kc. 


y 


but  too  well  in  conducting  them  to  the  temple  of 
idolatry ;  and  while  they  hide  from  their  view  the 
true  substance  of  morality,  have  infused  into  their 
simple  hearts  a   weak  attachment  for  its   mere 
shadow."     After  enumerating  some  of  the  evils 
arising  from  the  existing  theory  and   practice  of 
Hmdooism,  and  noticing  the  encouragement  held 
out  by  it  to  every  species  of  immorality  and  crime, 
he  thus   proceeds  :  "  My  reflections  upon  these 
solemn  truths  have   been  most  painful   for  many 
years.     I  have  never  ceased  to  contemplate,  with 
the  strongest  feelings  of  regret,  the  obstinate  ad- 
herence of  my  countrymen  to  their  fatal  system 
of  idolatry,  enduring,  for  the  sake  of  propitiating 
their  supposed  deities,  the  violation  of  every  hu"^ 
mane  and  social  feeling ;  and  this,  in  various  in- 
stances, but  more  especially   in  the  dreadful  acts 
of  self-destruction,   and   the   immolation    of  the 
nearest  relations,  under  the  delusion  of  conform- 
ing to  sacred  religious  rites.  I  have  never  ceased, 
I  repeat,  to  contemplate  these  practices  with  the 
strongest  feelings  of  regret,  and  to  view  in  them 
the  moral   debasement  of  a  race  who,  I  cannot 
help  thinking,  are  capable  of  better  things;  whoso 
susceptibility,  patience,  and   mildness  of  charac- 
ter, render  them  worthy  of  a  better  destiny.     Un- 
der these  impressions,  therefore,  I  have  been  im- 
pelled to  lay  before  them  genuine  translations  of 
parts  of  their  scripture,  which  inculcates  not  only 
the  enlightened  worship  of  one  God,  but  the  pu- 
rest principles  of  morality,  accompanied  with  such 
notices  as  I  deemed  requisite  to  oppose  the  ai^u- 

2 


L  '  \ 


J  PREFACE. 

ments  of  the  Brahmins,  in  defence  of  their  be- 
loved system.     Most  earnestly  do  I  pray,  that  the 
whole  may,  sooner  or  later,  prove  efficient  m  pro- 
ducing on  the  minds  of  Hin.loos  in  general,  a 
conviction  of  the  rationality  of  believmg  in  and 
adoring  the  Supreme  Bemg  only  ;  together  with 
a  complete  ])erLeption  and  practice  ot  that  grand 
and   .u)mprehensive    mural    principle— !».>   unto 
othtrs  as  yoi-  would  be  dune  by.'" 

Although  he  experienced  much  opposition  and 
discouragement  in  his  work  of  reformation,  he  had 
the  gratification  of  witnessing  in  many  instances 
the  beneficial  effects  of  his  labours.     «  It  is  with 
no  ordinary  feelings  of  satilaction,"  he  states  in 
the  preface  to  the  Cena  Upanishad,  "  that  1  have 
already    seen  many  respectable  persons  of  my 
countrymen,  to  the  great  disappointment  of  their 
spiritual  guides,  rise  superior  to  their  original  pre- 
iudices,  and  inquire  into  the   truths  of  religion. 
And  again,  in  his  preface  to  the  Kuth  Opunishud, 
he  writes,  "  The  great  body  of  my  countrymen, 
possessed  of  good  understandings,  and  not  mucli 
fettered  with  prejudices,  being  perfectly  satisfied 
of  the  truth  of  the  doctrines  contained  in  this,  and 
in  other  worl*s  already  laid  by  me  before  them, 
and  of  the  gross  errors  of  the  puerile  system  of 
idol  worship  which  they  were  led  to  follow,  have 
altered  their  religious  conduct  in  a  manner  becom- 
ing the  dignity  of  human  beings."     "  It  seems  to 
me,"  he  remarks  in  conclusion,  «  that  I  cannot 
better  employ  my  time,  than  in  an  endeavour  to 
illustrate  and  maintain  tf  uth,  and  to  render  service 


PREFACE. 


XI 


) 


to  my  fellow-labourers,  confiding  in  the  mercy  of 
that  Being  to  whom  the  motives  of  our  actions, 
and  secrets  of  our  hearts,  are  well  known." 

The  liberal  views,  and  the  devout  and  amiable 
spirit,  which  are  displayed  in  these  extracts,  and 
are,  indeed,  discernible  in  the  whole  of  the  au- 
thor's writings,  may  be  well  thought  to  have  dis- 
posed him  to  a  candid  examination  of  the  Chris- 
tian revelation.  From  the  perusal  of  the  New 
Testament,  in  his  ''  long  and  uninterrupted  re- 
searches into  relioious  truth,"  he  found,  he  asserts, 
"  the  doctrines  of  Christ  more  conducive  to  moral 
principles,  and  better  adapted  for  the  use  of  ra- 
tional beings,  than  any  other  which  had  come  to 
his  knowledge."*  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
however,  which  appeared  to  his  mind  quite  as  ob- 
jectionable as  the  Polytheism  of  the  Hindoos, 
presented  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  his  conver- 
sion to  Christianity,  as  he  found  it  professed  by 
those  with  whom  he  conversed.  But  as  the  system 
so  fully  approved  itself,  in  other  respects,  to  his 
reason  and  his  piety,  his  candour  would  not,  on 
account  of  this  single  difficulty,  allow  him  at  once 
to  reject  it  as  false.  As  the  most  likely  method 
of  acquiring  a  correct  knowledge  of  its  doctrines, 
he  determined  upon  a  careful  perusal  of  the  Jew- 
ish and  Christian  Scriptures  in  their  original  lan- 
guages. From  this  undertaking  he  arose  with  a 
firm  persuasion,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 

*  Preface  to  the  London  edition  of  the  Translation  of  the  Vedant. 
Monthly  Repository,  Vol.  XIV.  p.  562. 


xu 


PREVACK. 


rULFACE. 


XIII 


was  not  inculcated  in  them,  and  that  the  Christian 
reli<^ion  was  true  and  divine. 

Tlavincr  now  become,  upon  deliberate  and  ra- 
tional conviction,  a  Christian,  he  hastened  to  com- 
municate to  his  countrymen  such  a  view  of  the  re- 
ligion of  the  New  Testament  as  he  thousht  best 
adapted  to  impress  them  with  a  feeling  ot  its  ex- 
cellence, and  to   imbue  them  with  its  pure  and 
amiable  spirit.     For  this  purpose,  he  compded  the 
fi,st    pamphlet   inserted   in   the    present  volume 
which  he  intituled,  "The  Precepts  of  Jesus  the 
Guide  to  Peace  and    Happiness,'  &c.     To  this 
work,  which  consists  entirely  of  extracts  from  the 
moral  discourses   of    our  Lord,  he  prefixed  an 
«  Introtluction,"  in  which  he  stated  his  reasons  tor 
omitting  the  doctrines  an.l  the  historical  and  mi- 
raculous reunions  which  accompany  theni  m  the 
writings  of  the  evangelists.     Soon  after  the  pub- 
lication of  this  tract,  there  apf.eared  in       1  he 
Friend  of  India,"*  a  periodical  work  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  Baptist  missionaries,  an  article  ani- 
madverting upon  it,  which  was  signed  "A  Chris- 
tian  Missionary,"  but  written    by    the    Rev.  Mr. 
Schmidt.     To    this    paper,  Dr.  Marshn.an    the 
editor  of  the  magazine,  appended  some  "  Obser- 
vations" of  his  own,t  in  which  he  styled  the  com- 
piler of  the  "  Precepts,"  "  an  intelligent  Heathen, 
whose  mind  is  as  yet  completely  opposed  to  the 
<rrand  design  of  the  Saviour's  becoming  incarnate. 
°  These  "  Observations"  produced  the  second  ot 

*  No.  XX.  February,  1820. 

+  London  rdition  of  Dr.  Marshman's  Papers,  p.  1. 


^\ 


the  following  pamphlets,  intituled,  "  An   Appeal 
to  the  Christian  Public  in  Defeaceof  the  Precepts 
of  Jesus,  by  a  Friend  to  Truth."     The  writer  is 
now  known  to  have  been  Rammohun  Roy  himself. 
He  complains,  in  strong  terms,  of  the  application  to 
him  of  the  term  Heathen,  as  "a  violation  of  truth, 
charity,  and  liberality  ;"  and  also  controverts  some 
of  Dr.  Marshman's  objections  to  the  compilation, 
and  to  his  reasonings  in  the   introduction.     In  a 
subsequent  number  of  the  "  Friend  of  India,"* 
Dr.  Marshman  inserted  a  brief  reply  to  this  "  Ap- 
peal," in  which  he  still  denied  to  the  author  the 
title  of  "  Christian,"  because,  he  writes,  "  we  be- 
long to  that  class  who  think  that  no  one  can  be  a 
real  Christian  without  believing  the  divinity  and 
the  atonement  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  divine  au- 
thority of  the  whole  of  the  Christian  Scriptures," 
disclaiming,  however,   all  intentions  of  using  the 
term  "  Heathen"  in  an  invidious  sense. 

Dr.  jMarshman,  in  his  first  **  Observations,"  had 
promised  to  "  take  up  the  subject"  of  Rammo- 
hun Roy's  work  "  more  fully  in  the  first  number 
of  the  Quarterly  Series"  of  The  Friend  of  India, 
then  in  preparation.  Accordingly,  there  appeared 
in  that  publication  some  "  Observations  on  certain 
ideas  contained  in  the  Introduction  to  the  Pre- 
cepts of  Jesus  the  Guide  to  Peace  and  Happi- 
ness."! In  reply  to  this  paper,  Rammohun  Roy 
published  the  last  of  the  following  pamphlets,  in- 

*  No.  XXIII.  May,  18x>0.     Dr.  Marshman's  Papers,  London  edi- 
tion, p,  5. 

*  Idem,  p.  17,  Friend  of  India,  Septemher,  18^0. 


riirnrtininmrf^^gaaaBfe& 


XIV 


PREFACE. 


t.tuled,  "  A  Second  Appeal  to  the  Christian  Pub- 
lic in  Defence  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus.  lo 
this  tract  Dr.  Marshman  printed  an  elaborate  an- 
swer in  the  fourth  number  of  the  Quarterly  Series 
of  "  The  Friend  of  India."*  Here  the  discus- 
sion rests,  as  for  as  we  are  at  present  informed.t 

Dr  Marshmun's  friends  having  collected,  and 
printed  in  England,  his  papers  in  this  controver- 
sy,! it  was  thought  by  many  to  be  demanded  by 
truth  and   justice,    that  Rammohun    Roy  s  pam- 
phlets should  also  be  given  to  the  British  public,  to 
enable  them  to  form  an  accurate  judgment  of  the 
merits  of  both  the  parties  in  the  support  of  then- 
respective  tenets.     As  th.-ro  appeared  no  prospect 
of  the  work  being  undertaken  by  any  bookseller, 
the  Unitarian  Society  were  induced  to  become  the 
publishers.     They    are    aware  that,    holding,  as 
they  do,  the  strict  and  proper  humanity  of  Christ 
as  one  of  their  fundamental  tenets,  they  may  pos- 
sibly be  charged  with  a  dereliction  of  principle  in 
thus  circulating,  under  their   authority,   a   work 
which  maintains  his  prc-existence,  and  super-an- 
.elicrank  and  dignity.     But  they  rest  their  de- 
fence upon  the  peculiar  nature  of  the  case,  and 

*  December,  13il.     Dr.  Marshman's  Tracts,  London  edUion,  pp. 

")  The  reader  nray  he  referred,  for  son.e  further  parucu.ars  relaung 
to  Ramn,ohun  Key.  .o  the  Monthly  Repos.tory,  vo.^  MU  pp^.-  . 
&.C  •  XIV.  pp.  061,  kc. ;  XV.  pp.  1,  i^c. ;  XVI.  pp.  477,  he.,  XVU 
t;:i  fcc. -Ind  to  Mr.  Belshan,.  Introdacf.or,  to  W.  han,  Roberts  s 
Zf  Madrasl  Fiist  Letter  to  the  Unitarian  Society,  »8>8- 
^°\ ?he  ;  rkis  intituled,  "  A  Defence  of  the  Deity  and  Atone-ne  - 
of  Jesus  Chris,,  in  Reply  to  Ran.tnohun  Roy,  of  Calcutta,  by  Dr. 
Marshman.  of  Serampore."     London.  l!l2-2. 


FREFACi; 


XV 


upon  their  anxiety  to  give  every  possible  publicity 
to  so  learned  and  able  a  defence  of  the  great  doc- 
trine of  the  proper  unity  of  God,  from  the  pen  of 
a  Hindoo  convert  to  the  Christian  fauh. 

In  reprinting  the  following  piim[)hlets,  the  Cal- 
cutta editions  have  been  strictly  followed,  except 
in  a  few  instances,  in  which  some  obvious  typo- 
graphical errors  have  been  corrected  ;  and  even 
the  principal  of  these  corrections  have  been  in- 
serted in  brackets. 

It  is  not  intended  in  this  preface  to  enter  into  a 
review  of  the  controversy.     Dr.  Marshman  has, 
however,  made  a  remark,  which,  as  it  refers  to  the 
Unitarian  Society,  we  may  be  permitted  to  notice. 
In  raising  an  argument  for  the  Deity  of  Christ, 
upon  the  supposed  application  to  him  of  the  term 
"fellow"  in  the  English  translation  of  Zechariah 
xiii.  7,  he  thus  quotes  Rammohun  Roy's  criticism 
upon  that  text :  «  Unable  to  deny  this,  our  author 
merely  hints  in  a  note  that  w»  Immithi,  fellow, 
signifies  one  that  lives  near  another  ;  '  therefore, 
the  word  fellow,  in  the  English  translation,  is  not 
altogether  correct,  as  justly  observed  by  Arch- 
bishop Newcome  in  his  Improved  Version,'  lately 
published,"  adds  Dr.  Marshman,  "  by  the  Soci- 
NiANS  of  England."*     Dr.  Marshman    has   here 
allowed  his  zeal  to  outrun  his  knowledge.     The 
work  quoted  by  Rammohun  Roy  is   not   Arch- 
bishop Newcome's  translation  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  formed  the  basis  of  the  "  Improved 


* 


"  Dr.  3Iaishjnan's  Defence."  fcc  p.  13S, 


V 


l^ 


I 


XVI 


PREFACE. 


THE 


Version,"  published  by  the  Unitarian  Society  ,  but 
that  learned  prelate's  "  Attempt  towards  an  Im- 
proved Version,  &c.  of  the  Twelve  M.nor  Pro- 
phets ;"  a  production  well  worthy  of  the  perusal 
of  every  Biblical  student. 

It  is  with  regret  we  observe,  that  Dr.  Marsh- 
™an,  who,  in  general,  writes  like  a  -hoar  and  a 
gentleman,  has,  in  the  passage  above  cited,  con- 
descended to  imitate  the  conduct  of  some  low 
bigots  on  this  side  of  the  water,  in  designating  the 
Unitarians  by  the  term  "  Socinians,"  which  he 
must  know,  is  not  correctly  descriptive  of  he^ 
opinions,  and  is  generally  employed  as  an  epithet 

of  reproach.  .     ,     • 

With  almost  the  solitary  exception  of  this  devi- 
ation from  liberality,  it  affords  us  great  pl-a-"re  ° 
be  able  to  remark,  that  the  controversy  on  both 
sides  has  throughout  been  conducted  with  a  pmt 
of  Christian  candour  and  fairness,  which  is  highly 
honourable  to  the  able  and  learned  disputants. 

THOMAS  REES, 

Htcretary  to  Ihe  Unitarian  Soc{ef;i. 

Kennington,  March  14,  1823. 


PRECEPTS  OF  JESLS, 


THE 


GUIDE  TO  PEACE  AND  HAPPINESS  5 


EXTRACTED    FROM    THE 


BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT, 


ASCRIBED    TO    THE    FOUR    EVANGELISTS. 


WITH 


Evamlationn  into  &unnrvit  antr  iScnsaler. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITIOIi 


BOSTON: 
€lIRISTIA^  Register  Office^ 

1828. 


/v 


■^ 


XVI 


PREFACE. 


THE 


Version,"  published  by  the  Unitarian  Society  ,  but 
that  learned  prelate's  "  Attempt  towards  an   Im- 
proved Version,  &c.  of  the  Twelve  Minor  Pro- 
phets ;"  a  production  well  worthy  of  the  perusal 
of  every  Biblical  student.  ^     ,,      u 

It  is  with  regret  we  observe,  that  Dr.  Marsh- 
man,  who,  in  general,  writes  like  a  -*^».  «'•/"'*  ; 
gentleman,  has,  in  the  passage  above  cited,  con- 
descended to  imitate  the  conduct  of  some  lovv 
bigots  on  this  side  of  the  water,  .n  designating  the 
Unitarians  by  the  term  "  Socin.ans,'  which  he 
must  know,  is  not  correctly  descriptive  of  heir 
opinions,  and  is  generally  employed  as  an  epithet 

of  reproach.  ,     ■ 

With  almost  the  solitary  exception  of  this  devi 

ation  from  liberality,  it  affords  us  great  pl*'^^"'.^  ^ 
be  able  to  remark,  that  the  controversy  on  both 
sides  has  throughout  been  conducted  with  a  pmt 
of  Christian  candour  and  fairness,  which  is  highly 
honourable  to  the  able  and  learned  disputants. 

THOMAS  REES, 

Secretary  to  the  Unitarian  Societ;i. 

Kennington,  March  14,  1823. 


PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS, 


THE 


GUIDE  TO  PEACE  AND  HAPPINESS  5 


EXTRACTED    FROM    THE 


BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT, 


▲SCRIBED    TO    THE    FOUR    EVANGELISTS. 


WITH 


Evmnlatiom  into  ^nnnrvit  antr  MtnQaltt. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITIOJ^ 


BOSTON: 
Christian  Register  Offici^ 


4 


1828. 


A 


CONTENTS. 


\(h 


l\ 


The  Precepts  of  Jesus  the  Guide  to  Peace 
and  Happiness :  extracted  from  the  Books 
of  the  New  Testament,  ascribed  to  the 
Four  Evangelists  j 

An  Appeal  to  the  Christian  Public,  in  De- 
fence of  the   "  Precepts  of  Jesus''  99 

A  Second  Appeal  to  the  Christian  Pvhlic, 
in  Defence  of  the  "  Precepts  of  Jesus"    131 


(I 


/i 


\  / 


INTRODUCTION. 


A  coxWicTiON  in  the  mind  of  its  total  ignorance 
of  the  nature  and  of  the  specific  attributes  of  the 
Godhead,  and  a  sense  of  doubt  respecting   the 
real   essence  of  the  soul,  give  rise  to  feelings  of 
great  dissatisfaction  with   our  limited   powers,  as 
well  as  with  all  human  acquirements  which  fail  to 
inform  us  on   these   interesting  points.     On  the 
other  hand,  a  notion  of  the  existence  of  a  supreme 
superintending   power,  the  author  and  preserver 
of  this  harmonious  system,   who  has  organized, 
and  who  regulates  such  an  infinity  of  celestial  and 
terrestrial  objects ;  and   a  due  estimation  of  that 
law  which  teaches  that  man  should  do  unto  others 
as  he  would  wish  to  be  done  by,  reconcile  us  to 
human  nature,  and  tend  to  render  our  existence 
agreeable  to  ourselves,  and  profitable  to  the  rest 
of  mankind.     The  former  of  these  sources  of  sa- 
tisfaction, viz.  a  belief  in  God,  prevails  generally  : 
being  derived  either  from   tradition  and  instruc- 
tion, or  from  an  attentive  survey  of  the  wonderful 
skill  and   contrivance  displayed  in   the  works  of 
nature.     The  latter,  although  it  is  partially  taught 
also  in  every  system  of  religion  with  which  I  am 
acquainted,  is  principally   inculcated   by  Christi- 
anity.    This  essential  characteristic  of  the  Chris- 


XXVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


tian  religion  I  was  for  a  long  time  unable  to  dis- 
tinguish as  such,  amidst  the  various  doctrines  I 
found  insisted   upon   in  the  writings  of  Christian 
authors,  and  in  the  conversation  of  those  teachers 
of  Christianity  with  whom  I  have  had  the  honour 
of  holding  communication.     Amongst  those  opi- 
nions, the  most  prevalent  seems  to  be,  that  no  one 
is  justly  entitled  to  the   ap|)ellation  of  Christian 
who  does  not  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  well  as  in  tlie  divine  nature 
of  God,  the  Father  of  all  created  beings.     Many 
allow  a  much  greater  latitude   to  the  term  Chris- 
tian, and  consider  it  as  comprehending  all  who 
acknowledge  the   liible  to  contain  the  revealed 
will  of  God,  however  they  may  dilTer  from  others 
in  their  interpretations  of  particular  passages  of 
scripture;    whilst  some   reqfiirc   from   him  who 
claims  the  title  of  Christian,  only  an  adherence 
to  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  as  taught  by  himself, 
without  insisting  on  implicit  confidence  in  those 
of  the  Apostles,  as  being,  except  when  speakmg 
from  inspiration,  like  other  men,  liable  to  mistake 
and  error.     That  they  were  so  is  obvious  from 
the  several    instances  of  differences    of  opinion 
amongst  the  Apostles  recorded  in  the  Acts  and 

Epistles.* 

Voluminous  works,  written  by  learned  men  of 
particular  sects  for  the  purpose  of  establishing 
the  truth,  consistency,  rationality,  and  priority  of 

*  Vide  Acts,  ch.  xi.  vers.  2,  3.  ch.  xv.  vers.  2,  7. ;  1  Corinthians. 
Mi.  1.  ver.  12. :  (lalatians,  cb.  ii.  vers,  11  —  1'). 


liNTKODUCTIO-N. 


XVlll 


li 


( » 


their  own  peculiar  doctrines,  contain  such  a  vari- 
ety of  arguments,  that  I  cannot  hope  to  be 
able  to  adduce  here  any  new  reasonings  of  suf- 
ficient novelty  and  force  to  attract  the  notice  of 
my  readers.  Beside^:,  in  matters  of  religion  par- 
ticularly, men  in  general,  through  prejudice  and 
partiality  to  the  opinions  which  they  once  form, 
pay  little  or  no  attention  to  opposite  sentiments, 
(however  reasonable  they  may  be,)  and  often  turn 
a  deaf  ear  to  what  is  mo.^t  consistent  with  the  laws 
of  nature,  and  conformable  to  the  dictates  of  hu- 
man reason  and  divine  revelation.  At  the  same 
time,  to  those  who  are  not  biassed  by  prejudice,  and 
who  are,  by  the  grace  of  God,  open  to  conviction, 
a  simple  enumeration  and  statement  of  the  respec- 
tive tenets  of  different  sects  may  be  a  sufficient 
guide  to  direct  their  inquiries  in  ascertaining 
which  of  them  is  the  most  consistent  with  the  sa- 
cred traditions,  and  most  acceptable  to  common 
sense.  For  these  reasons,  I  decline  entering  into 
any  discussion  on  those  points,  and  confine  my  at- 
tention at  present  to  the  task  of  laying  before  my 
fellow-creatures  the  words  of  Christ,  with  a  trans- 
lation from  the  English  into  Sungskrit,  and  the 
language  of  Bengal.  1  feel  persuaded  that  by 
separating  from  the  other  matters  contained  in 
tlie  New  Testament,  the  moral  precepts  found  in 
that  book,  these  will  be  more  likely  to  produce 
the  desirable  effect  of  improving  the  hearts  and 
minds  of  men  of  different  persuasions  and  de- 
grees  of   understanding.      For,   historical,   and 


XIX 


INTRODUCTIO. 


some  other  passages,  are  liable  to  the  doubts  and 
disputes  of  free-thinkers  and  anti-christians,  es- 
pecially miraculous  relations,  which  are  much  less 
wonderful  than  the  fabricated  tales  handed  down 
to  the  natives  of  Asia,*  and  consequently  would 
be  apt  at  best  to  carry  liitle  weight  with  them. 
On  the  contrary,  moral  doctrines,  tending  evi- 
dently to  the  maintenance  of  the  peace  and  har- 
mony of  mankind  at  large,  are  beyond  the  reach 
of  metaphysical  perversion,  and  intelligible  alike 
to  the  learned  and  to  the  unlearned.  This  simple 
code  of  religion  and  morality  is  so  admirably  cal- 
culated to  elevate  men's  ideas  to  high  and  liberal 
notions  of  one  God,  who  has  equally  subjected 
all  living  creatures,  without  distinction  of  cast, 
rank,  or  wealth,  to  change,  disappointment,  pain, 
and  death,  and  has  equally  admitted  all  to  be  par- 
takers of  the  bountiful  mercies  which  he  has 
lavished  over  nature,  and  is  also  so  well  fitted  to 
regulate  the  conduct  of  the  human  race  in  the 
discharge  of  their  various  duties  to  God,  to  them- 
selves, and  to  society,  that  1  cannot  but  hope  the 
best  effects  from  its  promulgation  in  the  present 
form. 

*  Ugisti  is  famed  for  having  swallowed  the  ocean,  when  it  had 
given  him  offence,  md  having  restored  it  by  urinary  evacuation  :  at 
his  conimand,  also,  the  Vincihyu  range  of  mountains  prostrated 
itself,  and  so  remains.    [Wilson^  s  Dictionary.) 


.     ;  1^ 


I  I 


1 » 


1 


THE 


PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS 


THE 


CSfttllre  to  ^wre  anH  ^a»pim»». 


*  AxD  seeing  the  multitudes,  he  went  up  into  a 
mountain  ;  and  when  he  was  set,  his  disciples  came 
unto  him  ;  and  he  opened  his  mouth,  and  taught 
them,  saying.  Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit,  for 
theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Blessed  are 
they  that  mourn  :  for  they  shall  be  comforted. 
Blessed  are  the  meek :  for  they  shall  inherit  the 
earth.  Blessed  are  they  which  do  hunger  and 
thirst  after  righteousness  :  for  they  shall  be  filled. 
Blessed  are  the  merciful :  for  they  shall  obtain 
mercy.  Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart :  for  they 
shall  see  God.  Blessed  are  the  peacemakers : 
for  they  shall  be  called  the  children  of  God. 
Blessed  are  they  which  are  persecuted  for  right- 
eousness' sake  :  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  hea- 
ven. Blessed  are  ye,  when  men  shall  revile  you, 
and  persecute  you,  and  shall  say  all  manner  of 
evil  against  you  falsely,  for  my  sake.  Rejoice,  and 

*  Matthew,  ch«p.  »■. 


I 

I 


be  exceeding  glad  :  for  great  is  your  reward  in 
heaven  :  for  so  persecuted  tliey  the  prophets 
wliich  were  before  you. 

Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth  :  but  if  the  salt 
have  lost  his  savour,  wherewith  shall  it  be  salted  ? 
It  is  thenceforth  good  for  nothing,  but  to  be  cast 
out,  and  to  be  trodden  under  foot  of  men.  Ye  are 
the  light  of  the  whole  world.  A  city  that  is  set  on 
a  hill  cannot  be  hid.  ^either  do  men  light  a  can- 
dle, and  put  it  under  a  bushel,  but  on  a  candle- 
stick;  and  it  giveih  light  unto  all  that  are  in  the 
house.  Let  your  light  so  shine  before  men,  that 
they  may  see  your  good  works,  and  glorify  your 
Father  which  is  in  heaven. 

Think  not  that  1  am  come  to  destroy  the  Law, 
or  the  Prophets  :  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but 
to  fulfd.  For  verily  I  say  unto  you,  Till  heaven 
and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no 
wise  pass  from  the  law,  till  all  be  fulfilled.  Who- 
soever, therefore,  shall  break  one  of  these  least 
commandments,  and  shall  teach  men  so,  he  shall 
be  called  the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  : 
but  whosoever  shall  do  and  teach  them,  the  same 
shall  be  called  great  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
For  I  say  unto  you.  That  except  your  righteous- 
ness shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  case  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven. 

Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them  of  old 
time.  Thou  shalt  not  kill  ;  and  whosoever  shall 
kill  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgrment:  but  I  sav 


i 


unto  you,  That  whosoever  is  angry  with  his  brother 
without  a  cause  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judg- 
ment :  and  whosoever  shall  say  to  his  brother, 
Raca,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  council :  but  who- 
soever shall  say.  Thou  fool,  shall  be  in  danger  of 
hell  fire.  Therefore,  if  thou  bring  thy  gift  to  the 
altar,  and  there  rememberest  that  thy  brother 
hath  aught  against  thee ;  leave  there  thy  gift  be- 
fore the  altar,  and  go  thy  way  ;  first  be  reconi  iled 
to  thy  brother,  and  then  come  and  offer  thy  gift. 
Agree  with  thine  adversary  quickly,  whilst  thou 
art  in  the  way  with  him  ;  lest  at  any  time  the 
adversary  deliver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the 
judge  deliver  thee  to  the  officer,  and  thou  be  cast 
into  prison.  Verily  I  say  unto  thee.  Thou  shalt 
by  no  means  come  out  thence,  till  thou  hast  paid 
the  uttermost  farthing. 

Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them  of  old 
time,  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery  :  but  I  say 
unto  you,  That  whosoever  look(»th  on  a  woman  to 
lust  after  her,  hath  committed  adultery  with  her  al- 
ready in  his  heart.  And  if  thy  right  eye  offend 
thee,  pluck  it  out,  and  cast  */  from  thee :  for  it  is 
profitable  for  thee  that  one  of  thy  members  should 
perish,  and  not  that  thy  whole  body  should  be 
cast  into  hell.  And  if  thy  right  hand  offend  thee, 
cut  it  off,  and  cast  it  frotn  thee :  for  it  is  f)rofita- 
ble  for  thee  that  one  of  thy  members  should  pe- 
rish, and  not  that  thy  whole  body  should  be  cast 
into  hell.  It  hath  been  said.  Whosoever  shall  put 
away  his  wife,  let  him   give  her  a  writing  of  di- 


vorceiuent :  but  1  say  unto  you,  Tliat  whosoever 
shall  put  away  his  wife,  saving  for  the  cause  of 
fornication,  causeth  her  to  commit  adulterv  :  and 
whosoever  shall  marry  her  that  is  divorced  com- 
mitteth  adultery. 

Ye   have   heard   that  it  hath  been  said,  Thou 
shalt   love  thy  neighbour,  and   hate  thine  enemy. 
But  I  say  unto  you.  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them 
that  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that  hate  you,  and 
pray  for   them   which    despitefully  use   you,  and 
persecute  you  ;    that  ye   may   be  the  children  of 
your  Father  which   is  in  heaven :  for  he  maketh 
his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil   and  on  the  good,   and 
sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust.     For  if 
ye  love  them  which  love  you,  what  reward  have 
ye  ?  do  not  even  the  Publicans  the  same  ?     And 
if  ye  salute  your  brethren  only,  what  do  ye  more 
than  others  ?  do  not  even  the  Publicans  so  ?     Be 
ye  therefore  perfect,  even  as  your  Father  which  is 
in  heaven  is  perfect. 

*  Take  heed  that  ye  do  not  your  alms  before 
men,  to  be  seen  of  them  :  otherwise  ye  have  no 
reward  of  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven.  There- 
fore, when  thou  doest  thine  alms,  do  not  sound  a 
trumpet  before  thee,  as  the  hypocrites  do  in  the 
synagogues  and  in  the  streets,  that  they  may  have 
glory  of  men.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  They  have 
their  reward.  But  when  thou  doest  alms,  let  not 
thy  left  hand  know  what  thy  right  hand  doeth  : 


*  Matthew,  chap.  vi. 


that  thine  alms  may  be  in  secret :  and  thy  Father 
which  seeth  in  secret,  himself  shall  reward  thee 
openly. 

And  when  thou  prayest,  thou  shalt  not  be  as  the 
hypocrites  are :  for  they  love  to  pray  standing  in 
the  synagogues  and  in  the  corners  of  the  streets, 
that  they  may  be  seen  of  men.  Verily  I  say  unto 
you,  They  have  their  reward.  But  thou,  when 
thou  [)rayest,  enter  into  thy  closet,  and  when  thou 
hast  shut  thy  door,  pray  to  thy  Father  which  is  in 
secret;  and  thy  Father  which  seeth  in  secret,  shall 
reward  thee  openly.  But  when  ye  pray,  use  not 
vain  repetitions,  as  the  heathen  do  :  for  they  think 
that  they  shall  be  heard  for  their  much  speaking. 
Be  not  ye,  therefore,  like  unto  them  :  for  your  Fa- 
ther knoweth  what  things  ye  have  need  of,  before 
ye  ask  him.  After  this  manner,  therefore,  pray 
ye  ;  Our  Father  which  art  in  heaven,  hallowed  be 
thy  name.  Thy  kingdom  come.  Thy  will  be 
done  in  earth,  as  it  is  in  heaven.  Give  us  this 
day  our  daily  bread.  And  forgive  us  our  debts, 
as  we  forgive  our  debtors.  And  lead  us  not  into 
temptation,  but  deliver  us  from  evil :  for  thine  is 
the  kingdom,  and  the  power,  and  the  glory,  for 
ever.  Amen.  For  if  ye  forgive  men  their  tres- 
passes, your  heavenly  Father  will  also  forgive 
you  :  but  if  ye  forgive  not  men  their  trespasses, 
neither  will  your  Father  forgive  your  trespasses. 

Moreover  when  ye  fast,  be  not,  as  the  hypo- 
crites, of  a   sad  countenance  :  for  they  disfigure 

•  59 


)' 


their  iaces,  lliat  they  may  a|)pear  unto  men  to  fast. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  They  have  their  reward. 
But  thou,  when  thou  fastest,  anoint  thine  head, 
and  wash  thy  face ;  that  thou  appear  not  unto 
men  to  fast,  but  unto  thy  Father  who  is  in  secret : 
and  thy  Father,  who  seeth  in  secret,  shall  reward 
thee  openly. 

Lay  not  up  for  yourselves  treasures  upon  earth, 
where  moth  and  rust  doth  corrupt,  and  where 
thieves  break  through  and  steal :  but  lay  up  for 
yourselves  treasures  in  heaven,  where  neither 
moth  nor  rust  doth  corrupt,  and  where  thieves  do 
not  break  through  nor  stral :  for  where  your  trea- 
sure is,  there  will  your  heart  be  also.  The  light 
of  the  body  is  the  eye  :  if  therefore  thine  eye  be 
single,  thy  whole  body  shall  be  full  of  light.  But 
if  thine  eye  be  evil,  thy  whole  body  shall  be  full  of 
darkness.  If,  therefore,  the  light  that  is  in  thee 
be  darkness,  how  great  is  that  darkness ! 

No  man  can  serve  two  masters  :  for  either  he 
will  hate  the  one,  and  love  the  other  ;  or  else  he 
will  hold  to  the  one,  and  despise  the  other.  Ye 
cannot  serve  God  and  mammon.  Tht^refore  I  say 
unto  you.  Take  no  thought  for  your  life,  what  ye 
shall  eat,  or  what  ye  shall  drink  ;  nor  yet  for  your 
body,  what  ye  shall  put  on.  Is  not  the  lifr  more 
than  meat,  and  the  body  than  raiment  ?  Behold 
the  fowls  of  the  air;  for  they  sow  not,  neither  do 
they  reap,  nor  gather  into  barns ;  yet  your  hea- 
venly Father  feedeth  them.  Are  ye  not  much 
better  than  they  ?  Whicli  of  you  by  taking  thought 


J I  i 


r, 


i 


i 


can  add   one  cubit  unto  his  stature  ?    And  why 
take  ye  thought  for  raiment  ?     Consider  the  lilies 
of  the  field,  how  they  grow ;  they  toil  not,  neither 
do  they  spin :  and  yet  I  say  unto  you,  that  even 
Solomon  in  all  his  glory  was  not  arrayed  like  one 
of  these.     Wherefore,  if  God  so  clothe  the  grass 
of  the  field,  which  to-day  is,  and  to-morrow  is  cast 
into  the  oven,  shall  he  not  much  more  clothe  you, 
O  ye  of  little  faith  ?     Therefore  take  no  thought, 
saying.  What   shall  we   eat  ?  or.  What   shall  we 
drink  ?  or.  Wherewithal  shall  we  be  clothed  ?  (for 
after  all  these  things  do  the  Gentiles  seek  :)   for 
your  heavenly  Father  knoweth  that  ye  have  need 
of  all  these  things.     But  seek  ye  first  the  kingdom 
of   God,    and   his   righteousness ;    and   all  these 
things  shall  be  added  unto  you.     Ti\ke,  therefore, 
no  thought  for  the  morrow  :  for  the  morrow  shall 
take  thought  for  the  things  of  itself.     Sufficient 
unto  the  day  is  the  evil  thereof. 

*  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged.  For  with 
what  judgment  ye  judge,  ye  shall  be  judged  :  and 
with  what  measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured 
to  you  again.  And  why  beholdest  thou  the  mote 
that  is  in  thy  brother's  eye,  but  considerest  not  the 
beam  that  is  in  thine  own  eye  ?  Or  how  wilt  thou 
say  to  thy  brother.  Let  me  pull  out  the  mote  out  of 
thine  eye  ;  and,  behold,  a  beam  is  in  thine  own 
eye  ?  Thou  hypocrite,  first  cast  out  the  beam  out 
of  thine  own  eye  ;  and  then  shalt  thou  see  clearly 

*  >Tatthf»w,  chap.  vii. 


r 


u 


8 

10  cast  out  the  mote  out  of  thy  brother's  eye. 
Give  not  that  which  is  holy  unto  the  dogs,  neither 
cast  ye  your  pearls  before  swine,  lest  they  trample 
them  under  their  feet,  and  turn  again  and  rend  you. 
Ask,  and  it  shall  be  given  you;  seek,  and  ye  shall 
find ;  knock,  and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you  :  for 
every  one  that  asketh  receiveth  ;  and  he  that  seek- 
eth  findeth  ;  and  to  him  that  knocketh  it  shall  be 
opened.     Or  what  man  is  there  of  you,  whom   it 
his  son  ask  bread,  will  he  give  him  a  stone  .'Or 
if  he  ask  a  fish,  will  he  give  him  a  serpent .?     It  ye 
then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto 
your  children,  how  much   more  shall  your  Father 
which  is  in  heaven  give  good  things  to  them  that 
ask  him?     Therefore  all   things  whatsoever  ye 
would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to 
them :  for  this  is  the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 

Enter  ye  in  at  the  strait  gate  :  for  wide  is  the 
gate,  and  broad  is  the  way,  that  lea.icth  to  destruc- 
tion, and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat :  be- 
cause strait  is  the  gate,  and   narrow  is  the  vvay, 
which  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there  be  that  hnd 
it      Beware  of  false  prophets,  which  come  to  you 
in  sheep's  clothing,  but  inwardly  they  are  ravening 
wolves.     Ye  shall  know  them  by  their  fruits.     Uo 
men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles  ? 
Even  so  every  good  tree  bringeth  forth  good  truit ; 
but  a  corrupt  tree  bringeth  forth  evil  fruit.     A 
aood  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil  fruit,  neither  can 
a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth  good  fruit.     Every  tree 
that  bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit,  is  hewn  down, 


.^^;   >t(. 


;    . 


1  r 


9 

and  cast  into  the  fire.  Wherefore  by  their  fruits 
ye  shall  know  them.  Not  every  one  that  saith 
unto  me.  Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  heaven ;  but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  my  Fa- 
ther which  is  in  heaven.  Many  will  say  to  me  in 
that  day,  Lord,  Lord,  have  we  not  prophesied  in 
thy  name  ?  and  in  thy  name  have  cast  out  devils  ? 
and  in  thy  name  done  many  wonderful  works  ?  And 
then  will  I  profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you  : 
depart  from  me,  ye  that  work  iniquity. 

Therefore  whosoever  heareth  these  sayings  of 
mine,  and  doeth  them,  I  will  liken  him  unto  a  wise 
man,  which  built  his  house  upon  a  rock  :  and  the 
rain  descended,  and   the  floods  came,   and    the 
winds  blew,  and  beat  upon  that  house  ;  and  it  fell 
not :  for  it  was  founded  upon  a  rock.     And  every 
one  that  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine,  and  doeth 
them  not,  shall  be  likened    unto  a  foolish  man, 
which   built  his  house  upon   the    sand  :  and  the 
rain   descended,  and  the   floods   came,  and    the 
winds  blew,  and   beat  upon  that  house  ;  and  it 
fell :  and  great  was  the  fall  of  it.     And  it  caine  to 
pass,  when  Jesus  had  ended  these  sayings,  the  peo- 
ple were  astonished  at  his  doctrine  :  for  he  taught 
them  as  one  having  authority,  and  not  as  the 

Scribes. 

*  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  Jesus  snt  at  meat  m 
the  house,  behold,  many  Publicans  and  sinners 
came  and  sat  down  with  him  and  his  disciples- 

•  Matthew,  cliap.  ix.  10. 


V 


4    '^ 


lU 

Ana  wliou  il.c  Pharisees  saw  it,  tl.ey  said  unto  his 
disciphvs   Why  cateth  your  Master  with  Fubli- 
cnns  and  sinners  ?     But  when  Jesus  heard    hat 
he  said  ..nto  them,  They  that  be  f «'«  'f  ^  "^^ 
a  physician,  but  they  that  are   sick.     But  go  ye 
ami  learn  what  that  raeaneth,  I  will  have  mercy, 
and  not  sacrifice:  I  am  not  come  to  call  the  right- 
eous, but  sinners  to  repentance.     Theii  came  to 
,,im  the  disciples  of  John,  saying.  Why  do  we  and 
the  Pharisees  fast  oft,  but  thy  d.sc.ples  fast  not . 
And  Jesus  said  unto  them.  Can  the  children  of 
the  bri<le-ehambor  mourn,  as  long  as  the  bride- 
groom is  with  them  r     But  the  days  will  come, 
when  the  bridegroom  shall  be  taken  ^om  them 
and    then    shall  they    fast.     No    man    putteth  a 
piece  of  new  cloth  unto  an  old  garment,  for  that 
vhV.h  is  put  in  to  fill  it  up  taketh  from  the  gar- 
„,ent,  and  the  rent  is  made  worse.     Neither  do 
,ncn  put  new  wine  into  old  bottles:  else  the  ho- 
lies break,  and  the  wine  runneth  out,  and  the  bot- 
tles perish  ;  but  they  put  new  wine  into  new  bot- 
tles, and  both  are  preserved 

*  Behold,  I  send  you  forth  as  sheep  in  the 
.nidst  of  wolves :  be  ye,  therefore,  wise  as  ser- 
pents, and  harmless  as  doves.  But  beware  of 
inen  •  for  they  will  deliver  you  up  to  the  councils, 
and  thev  will  scourge  you  in  their  synagogues : 
.,„d  ye  "shall  be  brought  before  governors  and 
kin.rs  for  my  sake,  for  a  testimony  against  them 
aud^tho  Gentiles.     But  when  they  deliver  you  up, 


^ 


«  I    '• 


T 
1 


f    1 


f» 


take  nu  thought  how  or  what  ye  shall  speak  :  ibr 
it  shall  be  given  you  in  that  same  hour  what  ye  shall 
speak.  For  it  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Spirit  ot* 
your  Father  which  speaketh  in  you.    And  the  bro- 
ther shall  deliver  up  the  brother  to  death,  and  the 
father  the  child  :  and  the  children  shall  rise    up 
against  their  parents,   and  cause  them  to  be  put 
to  death.     And  ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  tnen  for 
ray  name's  sake  :  but  he  that  endureth  to  the  end 
shall  be  saved.     But  when  they  persecute  you  in 
this  city,  flee  ye  into  another  :  for  verily  1  say  unto 
you,  Ye  shall  not  have  gone  over  the  cities  of 
Israel,  till  the  Son  of  man  be  come.     The  disci- 
ple is  not  above  his  master,  nor  the  servant  above 
his  lord.     It  is  enough  for  the  disciple  that  he  be 
as  his  master,  and  the  servant  as  his  lord.     If  they 
have  called  the   master  of  the  house   Beelzebub, 
how  much  more  shall  they  call  them  of  his  house- 
hold ?     Fear  them  not  therefore  ;  for  there  is  no- 
thing covered,  tliat  shall  not  be  revealed  ;  and  hid, 
that  shall  not  be  known.  What  I  tell  you  in  dark- 
ness, that  speak  ye  in  light :  and  what  ye  hear  in 
the  ear,  that  preach  ye  upon  the  housetops.      \nd 
fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able 
to  kill  the  soul ;  but  rather  fear  him  which  is  able 
to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in   hell.     Are   not 
two  sparrows  sold  for  a  farthing?    and  one  of 
them  shall  not  fall  on  the  ground  without  your  Fa- 
ther-    But  the  very  hairs  of  your  head  are   all 
numbered.     Fear  ye  not,  therefore, ye  are  of  more 
value   than  many  sparrows.     Whosoever,  there- 


\. 


r  « 


12 

fore,  shall  confess  me  before  men,  liim  will  I  con- 
fess also  before  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven. 
But  whosoever  shall  deny  me  before  men,  him  will 
I  also  deny  before  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven. 
Think  not  that  1  come  to  send  peace  on  earth  : 
I  came  not  to  send  peace,  but  a  sword.  For  I  am 
come  to  set  a  man  at  variance  against  his  father, 
and  the  daughter  against  her  mother,  and  the 
daughter-in-law  against  her  mother-in-law.  And 
a  man's  foes  iihall  he  they  of  his  own  household. 
He  that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  me,  is 
not  worthy  of  me  :  and  he  that  loveth  son  or 
daughter  more  than  me,  is  not  worthy  of  me. 
And  he  that  taketh  not  his  cross,  and  followeth 
after  me,  is  not  worthy  of  me.  He  that  findeth 
his  life  shall  lose  it :  and  he  that  loseth  his  life 
for  my  sake  shall  find  ii.  He  that  receiveth  you 
receiveth  me,  and  he  that  receiveth  me  receiveth 
him  that  sent  me.  He  that  receiveth  a  prophet 
in  the  nameof  a  prophet,  shall  receive  a  prophet's 
reward  ;  and  he  that  receiveth  a  righteous  man  in 
the  name  of  a  righ:eous  man,  shall  receive  a  right- 
eous man's  reward.  And  whosoever  shall  give  to 
drink  unto  one  of  these  little  ones  a  cup  of  cold 
water  only  in  the  name  of  a  disciple,  verily  I  say 
unto  you,  he  shall  in  no  wise  lose  his  reward. 

*  At  that  time  Jesus  answered  and  said,  I  thank 
thee,  O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  because 
thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  pru- 

*  Matthew,  chap.  xi.  25. 


'       -r  ' 


1^ 

dent,  and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes.     Even 
so.  Father :  for  so  it  seemed  good  in  ti^y  sight.  All 
things  arc  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father :  and 
no  man  knoweth  the  Son,  but  the  Father;  neither 
knoweth  any  man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and 
he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  him.   Come 
unto  me,  all  ye  that  labour  and  are  heavy  laden, 
and  I  will  give  you  rest.     Take  my  yoke  upon  you, 
and  learn  of  me ;  for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in 
heart :  and  ye  shall  find  rest  unto  your  souls.    For 
my  yoke  is  easy,  and  my  burden  is  light. 

*  At  that  time  Jesus  went  on  the  Sabbath-day 
through  the  corn  ;  and  his  disciples  were  an  hun- 
gered, and  began  to  pluck  the  ears  of  corn,  and 
to  eat.     But  when  the  Pharisees  saw  it,  they  said 
unto  him.  Behold,  thy  disciples  do  that  which  is 
not  lawful  to  do  upon   the  Sabbath-day.     But  he 
said  unto  them,  Have  ye  not  read  what  David  did. 
when  he  was  an  hungered,  and  they  that  were 
with  him  ;  how  he  entered  into  the  house  of  God, 
and  did  eat  the  shewbread,  which  was  not  lawful 
for  him  to  eat,  neither  for  them  which  were  with 
him,  but  only  for  the  priests  r  Or  have  ye  not 
read  in  the  law,  how  that  on  the  Sabbath-days  the 
priests  in  the  temple  profime  the  Sabbath,  and  are 
blameless?     But   I  say  unto  you.  That  in  this 
place  is  one  greater  than  the  temple.     But  if  yc 
had  known  what  this  meaneth,  \  \\\\\  have  mercy, 
and  not  sacrifice,  ye  would  not  have  condemned 

^-  Matthew,  chap.  xii. 


'/ 


ii 


*    »l 


f4 


•\ 


the  guiltless.  For  the  Son  of  man  is  Lord  even 
of  the  Sabbath-dav. 

And  when  he  was  departed  thence,  he  went 
into  their  synagogue  :  And,  behold,  there  was  a 
man  which  had  hia  hand  withered.  And  they 
asked  him,  saying.  Is  it  lawful  to  heal  on  the  Sab- 
bath-days ?  that  they  might  accuse  him.  And  he 
said  unto  them.  What  man  shall  there  be  among 
you,  that  shall  have  one  sheep,  and  if  it  fall  into  a 
pit  on  the  Sabbath-day,  will  he  not  lay  hold  on  it, 
and  lift  it  out  ?  How  much  then  is  a  man  bet- 
ter than  a  sheep!  Wherefore  it  is  lawful  to  do 
well  on  the  Sabbath-days.  Then  saith  he  to  the 
man.  Stretch  forth  thine  hand.  And  he  stretched 
it  forth  ;  and  it  was  restored  whole,  like  as  the 
other. 

*  He  that  is  not  with  me  is  against  me  ;  and 
he  that  gathereth  not  with  me  scattereth  abroad. 
Wherefore  I  say  unto  you.  All  manner  of  sin  and 
blasphemy  shall  be  forgiven  unto  men :  but  the 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be 
forgiven  unto  men.  And  whosoever  speaketh  a 
word  against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be  forgiven 
him:  but  w^hosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy 
Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this 
world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come.  Either  make 
the  tree  good,  and  his  fruit  good  ;  or  else  make 
the  tree  corrupt,  and  his  fruit  corrupt :  for  the  tree 
is  known  by  his  fruit.     O  generation  of  vipers. 

"   Mattliew,  chap.  xii.  30. 


i 

i 

«  4 


I 

\ 

S 

(■■ 

t 

r 

\ 


/      .r' 


15 


how  can  ye,  being  evil,  speak  good  things  ?  for 
out  of  the  abundance  of  the  heart  the  mouth 
speaketh.  A  good  man  out  of  the  good  treasure 
of  the  heart  bringeth  forth  good  things :  and  an 
evil  man  out  of  the  evil  treasure  bringeth  forth 
evil  things.  But  I  say  unto  you.  That  every  idle 
word  that  men  shall  sj^eak,  they  shall  give  account 
thereof  in  the  day  of  judgment.  For  by  thy 
words  thou  shalt  be  justified,  and  by  thy  words 
thou  shalt  be  condemned. 

While  he  yet  talked  to  the  people,  behold,  his 
mother  and  his  brethren  stood  without,  desiring 
to  speak  with  him.  Then  one  said  unto  him, 
Behold,  thy  mother  and  brethren  stand  without, 
desiring  to  speak  w'wh  thee.  But  he  answered 
and  said  unto  him  that  told  him.  Who  is  my  mo- 
ther ?  and  who  are  my  brethren  ?  And  he  stretch- 
ed forth  his  hand  toward  his  disciples,  and  said, 
Behold  my  mother  and  my  brethren  !  For  whoso- 
ever shall  do  the  will  of  my  Father  which  is  in 
lieaven,  the  same  is  my  brother,  and  sister,  and 
mother. 

*  The  same  day  went  Jesus  out  of  the  house, 
and  sat  by  the  sea-side.  And  great  multitudes 
were  gathered  together  unto  him,  so  that  he  went 
into  a  ship,  and  sai ;  and  the  whole  multitude 
stood  on  the  shore.  And  he  spake  many  things 
unto  them  in  parables,  saying,  Behold,  a  sower 
went  forth  to  sow;  and  when  he  sowed,  some 


'■'  Matthew,  chap.  Mil. 


} 


u 


10 


17 


seeds  tell  by  the  way  side,  and  the  fowls  came  and 
devoured  them  up :  some  fell  upon  stony  places, 
where  they  had  not  much  earth :  and  forthwith 
they  sprung  up,  because  they  had  no  deepness  of 
earth :  and  when  the  sun  was  up,  they  were 
scorched  ;  and  because  they  had  no  root,  they 
withered  away.  And  some  fell  among  thorns ; 
and  the  thorns  sprung  up,  and  choked  them :  but 
other  fell  into  good  ground,  and  brought  forth 
fruit,  some  an  hundredfold,  some  sixtyfold,  some 
ihirtyfold.  Who  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear. 
And  the  disciples  came,  and  said  unto  him,  Why 
^peakest  thou  unto  them  in  parables  ?  He  an- 
swered and  said  unto  thi  m,  Because  it  is  given 
unto  you  to  know  the  mysteries  of  ilu)  kingdom  of 
heaven,  but  to  them  it  is  not  given.  For  whoso- 
ever hath,  to  him  shall  be  !riven,and  he  shall  have 
more  abundance  :  but  whosoever  hath  not,  from 
him  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  he  hath. 
Therefore  speak  I  to  them  in  parables  :  because 
they  seeing,  see  not ;  and  hearing  they  hear  not, 
neither  do  they  understand.  And  in  them  is  ful- 
filled the  prophecy  of  Ksaias,  which  saith.  By 
hearing  ye  shall  hear,  and  shall  not  understand  ; 
and  seeing  ye  shall  see,  and  shall  not  perceive  : 
for  this  people's  heart  is  waxed  gross,  and  their 
ears  are  dull  of  hearing,  and  their  eyes  they  have 
closed  ;  lest  at  any  time  they  should  see  with  their 
eyes,  and  hear  with  their  ears,  and  should  under- 
stand with  their  heart,  and  should  be  converted, 
and  I  should  heal   them.     But  blessed  arc  vour 


-^ 


eyes,  [for  they  see  :  and  your  ears,]  for  they  hear. 
For  verily  I  say  unto  you.  That  many  prophets 
and  righteous  men  have  desired  to  see  those  things 
which  ye  see,  and  have  not  seen  thein ;  and  to 
hear  those  things  whic^h  ye  hear,  and  have  not 
heard  them.  Hear  ye,  therefore,  the  parable  of 
the  sower.  When  any  one  heareth  the  word  of 
the  kingdom,  and  understandeth  tt  not,  then  Com- 
eth the  wicked  one,  and  catcheth  away  that  which 
was  sown  in  his  heart.  This  is  he  which  received 
seed  by  the  way  side.  But  he  that  received  the  seed 
into  stony  places,  the  same  is  he  that  heareth  the 
word,  and  anon  with  joy  receiveth  it :  yet  hath  he 
not  root  in  himself,  but  dureth  for  a  while  :  for 
when  tribulation  or  persecution  ariseth  because  of 
the  word,  by  and  by  he  is  offended.  He  also  that 
received  seed  among  the  thorns  is  he  that  heareth 
the  word ;  and  the  care  of  this  world,  and  the  deceit- 
fulness  of  riches,  choke  the  word,  and  he  beconi- 
eth  unfruitful.  But  he  that  received  seed  into  the 
good  ground,  is  he  that  heareth  the  word,  and 
understandeth  it;  which  also  beareth  fruit,  and 
bringeih  forth,  some' an  hundredfold,  some  sixty, 
some  thirty.  Another  parable  put  he  forth  unto 
them,  saying.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened 
unto  a  man  who  sowed  good  seed  in  his  field  :  but 
while  men  slept,  his  enemy  came  and  sowed  tares 
among  the  wheat,  and  went  his  way.  But  when 
the  blade  was  sprung  up,  and  brought  forth  fruit, 
then  appeared  the  tares  also.  So  the  servants  of 
liie  householder  came  and  said  unto  him,  Sir,  didst 

6 


I 


I 
'I 


1  f 


/ 


'  \ 


18 

not  thou  sow  good  seed  in  thy  field  ?  From  whence 
then  hath  it  tares  ?  He  said  unto  them,  An  enemy 
hath    done   this.     The    servants  said    unto  him, 
Wilt  thou  then  that  we  ffo  and  cjather  them  up  ? 
But  he  said,  Nay  ;  lest  while  ye   gather  up  the 
tares,  ye  root  up  also  the  wheat  with  them.     Let 
both  grow  together  until  the  harvest :  and  in  the 
time  of  harvest  I  will  say  to  the  reapers,  Gather 
ye  together  first  the  tares,  and  bind  them  in  bun- 
dles to  burn  them  :  but  gather  the  wheat  into  my 
barn.     Another  parable  put  he  forth  unto  them, 
saying,  The  kingdom  of  heavin  is  like  to  a  grain 
of  musiard  seed,  which  a  man  took,  and  sowed  in 
his  field  :  which  indeed  is  the  least  of  all  seeds ; 
but  when  it  is  grown,  it  is  the  greatest  among 
herbs,   and   becometh  a  tree,  so  that  the  birds  of 
the  air  come  and  lodge  in  the  branches  thereof. 
Another  parable  spake  he  unto  them  ;  The  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  like  unto  leaven,  which  a  woman 
took,  and  hid  in  three  measures  of  meal,  till  the 
whole  was  leavened.     All  these  things  spake  Je- 
sus unto  the  multitude  in  parables ;  and  without  a 
parable  spake  he  not  unto  them  :  that  it  tni^rht  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  thr  jMrophet,  saying, 
I  will   open   my  mnuth  m   parables;  I   will  utter 
things  which  have  been  kept  secret  from  the  fecun- 
dation of  the  world.      I'hen  Jesus  sent  the  multi- 
tude away,  and  went  into  the  house  :  and  his  dis- 
ciples came  unto  him,  saying.  Declare  unto  us  the 
parable  of  the  tares  of  the  fi(dd.     He  answered 
and  said  unto  them,  He  that  soweth  the  good  seed 


r 
4 


4 
4 


i 


19 

is  the  Son  of  man ;  the  field  is  the  world ;  the 
good  seed  are  the  children  of  the  kingdom  ;  but 
the  tares  are  the  children  of  the  wicked  one :  the 
enemy  that  sowed  them  is  the  devil  ;  the  harvest 
is  the  end  of  the  world  ;  and  the  reapers  are  the 
angels.  As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered  and 
burned  in  the  fire  ;  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  this 
world.  The  fc^on  of  man  shall  send  forth  his  an- 
gels, and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all 
things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity  ; 
and  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire :  there 
shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth.  Then 
shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the 
kingdom  of  their  Father.  Who  hath  ears  to  hear, 
let  him  hear. 

*  Then  came  to  Jesus  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
which  were  of  Jerusalem,  saying,  Why  do  thy 
disciples  transgress  the  tradition  of  the  elders? 
for  they  wash  not  their  hands  when  they  eat 
bread.  But  he  answered  and  said  unto  them. 
Why  do  you  also  transgress  the  commandment  of 
God  by  your  tradition  ?  For  God  commanded, 
saying.  Honour  thy  father  and  itiother :  and,  He 
that  curseth  father  or  mother,  let  him  die  the  death. 
But  ye  say.  Whosoever  shall  say  to  his  father  or 
his  mother.  If  is  a  gift,  by  whatsoever  thou  might- 
est  be  profited  by  me  ;  and  honour  not  his  father 
or  his  mother,  he  shall  be  free.     Thus  have  ye 

made  the  commandment   of  God  of  none  eflfect 

• 

*  Matthew,  chap.  xv. 


i 


i 

4 

t 


Jt) 


21 


I    h 


by  your  tradition.     Ye  hypocrites,  well  did  Esaias 
prophesy   of  you,   saying,   This  people  drawcth 
niffh  unto  me  with  their  mouth,  and  honoureth  me 
with  their  lips  ;  but  their  heart  is  far  from  me. 
But  in  vain  they  do  worship  me,  teaching /or  doc- 
trines the  commandments  of  men.     And  he  call- 
ed  the  multitude,  and  said  unto  them,  Hear  and 
understand :  Not  that  which  goeth  into  the  mouth 
defileth  a  man  ;  but  that  which  cometh  out  of  the 
mouth,  this  defileth  a  man.     Then  came  his  dis- 
ciples, and  said  unto  him,  Knowest  thou  that  the 
Pharisees  were  offended,  after   they  heard   this 
saying  ?     But  he  answered  and  said.  Every  plant 
which  my  heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted,  shall 
be  rooted  up.     Let  them  alorie  :  they  be  blind 
leaders  of  the  blind.     And  if  the  blind  lead  the 
blind,  both  shall  fall  into  the  ditch.     Then   an- 
swered Peter  and  said  unto  him,  Declare  unto  us 
this  parable.     And  Jesus  said.  Are  ye  also  yet 
without   understanding?     Do   not  ye   yet  under- 
stand, that  whatsoever  entereth  in  at  the  mouth 
goeth  into  the   belly,  and  is  cast   out  into   the 
draught  ?  But  those  things  which  proceed  out  of 
the  mouth  come  forth  from  the  heart ;  and  they 
defile  the    man.     For  out  of  the  heart  proceed 
evil    thoughts,   murders,  adulteries,   fornications, 
thefts,  false  witnesses,  blasphemies  :  these  are  the 
thmgs  which   defile  a  man  :  but  to  eat  with  un- 
washen  hands  defileth  not  a  man. 

*  And  when   his  disciples  were  come  to  the 

*  Matthew,  chap.  xvi.  .'.. 


* 


I 


-r 


i 


1 
i 


other  side,  they  had  forgotten  to  take  bread.  Then 
.Tesus  said  unto  them.  Take  heed  and  beware  of 
the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees. 
And  they  reasoned  among  themselves,  saying,  It 
is  because  we   have   taken    no  bread.      Which 
when  Jesus  perceived,  he  said  unto  them,  O  ye 
of  little  faith,  why  reason  ye  among  yourselves, 
because  ye  have  brought  no  bread  ?     How  is  it 
that  ye  do  not  understand  that  I  spake  it  not  to 
you  concerning  bread,  that  ye  should  beware  of 
the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Saddu- 
cees ?     Then  understood  they  how  that  he  bade 
them  not  beware  of  the  leaven  of  bread,  but  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Saddu- 
cees. 

When  Jesus  came  into  the  coasts  of  Csesarea 
Philippi,  he  asked  his  disciples,  saying.  Whom 
do  men  say  that  I  the  Son  of  man  am  ?  And 
they  said,  Some  say  that  thou  art  John  the  Bap- 
tist :  some,  Elias  ;  and  others,  Jeremias,  or  one 
of  the  prophets.  He  saith  unto  them.  But  whom 
say  ye  that  I  am  ?  And  Simon  Peter  answered 
and  said.  Thou  art  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living 
God.  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him. 
Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona :  for  flesh  and 
blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my  Fa- 
ther who  is  in  heaven.  And  I  say  also  unto  thee. 
That  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will 
build  my  church ;  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not 
prevail  against  it.  And  1  will  give  unto  thee  the 
kevs  of  the  kini^dom  of  heaven  :  and  whatsoever 


M 


I 


22 

thou  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven: 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be 
loosed  in  heaven.     Then  charged  he  his  disciples 
that  they  should  tell  no  man  that  he  was  Jesus  the 
Christ.     From  that  time  forth  began  Jesus  to  show 
unto  his  disciph  s,  how  that  he  must  go  into  Jeru- 
salem, and  suffer  many  things  of  the   elders  and 
chief  priests  and  Hcrib.s,  and   be   killed,  and  be 
raised  again  the  third  day.     Then  Peter  took  him, 
and  began  to  rebuke  him,  saying,  Be  it  far  from 
thee,  Lord  :  this  shall  not  be  unto  thee.     But  he 
turned,  and  said  unto  Peter,  Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan  :  thou  art  an  offence   unto  me  :    for   thou 
savourest  not  the  things  that  be  of  God,  but  those 
that  be  of  men.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  his  disci- 
ples. If  any  man  will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny 
himself,  and  take  up  his  cross,  and  follow  me.  For 
whosoever  will  save  his  life  shall  lose  it :  and  who- 
soever will  lose  his  life  for  my  sake  shall  find  it. 
For  what   is  a  man   profited,  if  hc^  shall  gain  the 
whole  world,  and  lose  his  own  soul  ?  Or  what  shall 
a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  soul  ?  For  the  Son 
of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with 
his  angels  ;  and  then  he  shall  reward  every  man 
according  to  his  works.     Verily  I   say  unto  you, 
There  be  some  standing  here,  which   shall   not 
taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  com- 

in2  in  his  kingdom. 

At  the  same  time  came  the  disciples  unto  J(^- 

*  Matthew,  chap,  xviii. 


'  r< 


*,' 


I 


1 


'26 

sus,  saying.  Who  is  the  greatest  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  ?  And  Jesus  called  a  little  child  unto 
him,  and  set  him  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  said, 
Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Except  ye  be  converted, 
and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Whosoever,  there- 
fore, shall  humble  himself  as  this  little  child,  the 
same  is  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And 
v;hoso  shall  receive  one  such  little  child  in  my 
name,  receiveth  me.  But  whoso  ^hall  offend  one 
of  these  little  ones  whi(  h  believe  in  me,  it  wxre 
better  for  him  that  a  millstone  were  hanged  about 
his  neck,  and  that  he  were  drowned  in  the  depth 
of  the  sea. 

Wo  unto  the  world  because  of  offences !  For 
it  must  needs  be  that  oflences  come ;  but  wo  to 
that  man  by  whom  the  offence  cometh !  Where- 
fore if  thy  hand  or  thy  foot  offend  thee,  cut  them 
off,  and  cast  them  from  thee :  it  is  better  for  thee 
to  enter  into  life  halt  or  maimed,  rather  than  hav- 
ing two  hands  or  two  feet  to  be  cast  into  evei  last- 
ing fire.  And  if  ihine  eye  oflend  thee,  pluck  it 
out,  and  cast  it  from  thee  :  it  is  belter  for  thee  to 
enter  into  life  with  one  eye,  rather  than  having 
two  eyes  to  be  cast  into  hell  fire.  Take  heed 
that  ye  despise  not  one  of  these  little  ones;  for  I 
say  unto  you,  That  in  heaven  their  angels  do  al- 
ways behold  the  face  of  my  Father,  which  is  in 
heaven.  For  the  Son  of  man  is  come  to  save  that 
which  was  lost.  How  think  ye  ?  If  a  man  have 
an    hundred  sheep,  and    one  of   them  be  gone 


1 


24 

astray,  doth  he  not  leave  the  ninety  and  nine,  and 
goeth  into  the  mountains,  and  seeketh  that  which 
is  gone  astray  ?  And  if  so  be  that  he  find  it,  verily 
I  say  unto  you,  he  rejoiceth  more  of  that  sheep, 
than  of  the  ninety  and  nine  which  went  not  astray. 
Even  so  it  is  not  the  will  of  your  Father  which  is 
in  heaven,  that  one  of  these  little  ones  should  pe- 
rish. Moreover,  if  thy  brother  shall  trespass 
against  thee,  go  and  tell  him  his  fault  between 
thee  and  him  alone  :  if  he  shall  hear  thee,  thou 
hast  gained  thy  brother.  But  if  he  will  not  hear 
thee,  then  take  with  thee  one  or  two  more,  that 
in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every  word 
may  be  established.  And  if  he  shall  neglect  to 
hear  them,  tell  it  unto  the  church  :  but  if  he  ne- 
slect  to  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  unto  thee  as 
an  heathen  man  and  a  publican.  Verily  1  say  unto 
you,  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be 
bound  in  heaven  :  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven.  Again  I  say 
unto  you.  That  if  two  of  you  shall  agree  on  earth 
as  touching  any  thing  that  they  shall  ask,  it  shall 
be  done  for  them  of  my  Father  which  is  in  hea- 
ven. For  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  toge- 
ther in  my  name,  there  am  1  in  the  mid«t  of  them. 
Then  came  Peter  to  him,  and  said,  Lord,  how 
oft  shall  my  brother  sin  against  me,  and  I  forgive 
him  ?  Till  seven  times  ?  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  I 
say  not  unto  thee,  Until  seven  times  :  but,  Until 
seventy  times  seven.  Therefore  is  the  kingdom 
of  heaven   likened    unto  a  certain  king,  which 


\ 


would  take  account  of  his  servants.  And  wlien 
he  had  begun  to  reckon,  one  was  brought  unto 
him,  which  owed  him  ten  thousand  talents.  But 
forasmuch  as  he  had  not  to  pay,  his  lord  command- 
ed him  to  be  sold,  and  his  wife,  and  children,  and 
all  that  he  had,  and  payment  to  be  made.  The 
servant  therefore  fell  down,  and  worshipped  him, 
saying.  Lord,  have  patience  with  me,  and  I  will 
pay  thee  all.  Then  the  lord  of  that  servant  was 
moved  with  compassion,  and  loosed  him,  and  for- 
gave him  the  debt.  But  the  same  servant  went 
out,  and  found  one  of  his  fellow-servants,  which 
owed  him  an  hundred  pence  :  and  he  laid  hands 
on  him,  and  took  him  by  the  throat,  saying.  Pay 
me  that  thou  owest.  And  his  fellow-servant  fell 
down  at  his  feet,  and  besought  him,  saying,  Have 
patience  with  me,  and  I  will  pay  thee  all.  And 
he  would  not :  but  went  and  cast  him  into  prison, 
till  he  should  pay  the  debt.  So  wh<^n  his  fell'  w- 
servants  saw  what  was  done,  they  were  very  sorry, 
and  came  and  told  unto  their  lord  all  that  was 
done.  Then  his  lord,  after  that  ho  had  called  him, 
said  unto  him,  O  thou  wicked  servant,  1  forgave 
thee  all  that  debt,  because  thou  desiredst  me  : 
shouldest  not  thou  also  have  had  compassion  on 
thy  fellow-servant,  even  as  I  had  pity  on  thee  ? 
And  his  lord  was  wroth,  and  delivered  him  to  the 
tormentors,  till  he  should  pay  all  that  was  due 
unto  him.  So  likewise  shall  my  heavenly  Father 
do  also  unto  you,  if  ye  from  your  hearts  forgive 
not  every  one  his  brother  their  trespasses. 


20 


< 


^  The  Pharisees  also  came  unto  him,  tempimg 
him,  and  saying  unto  him,  Is  it  lawful  for  a  man 
to  put  away  his  wife  for  every  cause  ?     And  he  an- 
swered and  said  unto  ihrm.  Have  ye  not  read,  that 
he  which  made  Hum  at  the  beirinning  made  them 
male  and  fl^male,  and  said,  For  this  cause  shall  a 
man  leave  father  and  mother,  and  shall  cleave  to 
his    wife:    and    they  twain   shall    be  one  flesh? 
Wherefore  they  are  no  more  twain,  but  one  flesh. 
What  therefore  God  hath  joined  together,  let  not 
man  put  asunder.     They  say  unto  him,  Why  did 
Moses  then  command  to  give  a  writing  of  divorce- 
ment, and  to  put  her  away  ?     He  saith  unto  them, 
Moses  because  of  the  hardness   of  your   hearts 
suffered  you  to  put  away  your  wives  :  but  from  the 
beginning  it  was  not  so.     And  I  say  unto  you, 
Whosoev^er  shall  put  away  his  wife,  except  it  he 
for  fornication,  and  shall  marry  another,  commit- 
teth  adultery  :  and  whoso  marrieth  her  which  is 
put  away  doth  commit  adultery.     His  disciples 
say  unto  him,  If  the  case  of  the  man  be  so  with 
hu  wife,  it  is  not  good  to  marry.     But  he  said  unto 
them,  All  vun  cannot  receive  this  saying,  save 
thu  to  whom  it  is  given.     For  there  are  some 
eunuchs,  which  were  so  born  from  their  mother's 
womb :  and  there  are  some  eunuchs,  which  were 
made  eunuchs  of  men  :  and  there   be  eunuchs, 
which  have  made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven's  sake.     He  that  is  able  to  recei\^ 
it^  lei  him  receive  if. 

*  Matthew,  chap.  xix.  f\. 


27 


Then  were  there  brought  unto  him  little  chil- 
dren, that  he   should  put  his  hands  on  them,  and 
pray :  and  the  disciples  rebuked  them.     But  Je- 
sus said,  SuflTer  little  children,  and  forbid  them  not, 
to  come  unto  me  :  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.     And  he  laid  his  hands  on  them,  and  de- 
parted thence.     And,  behold,  one  came  and  said 
unto  him,  Good  Master,  what  good  thing  shall  I 
do,  that  I  may  have  eternal  life  ?     And   he  said 
unto  him.   Why  callest  thou   me  good  ?  there  is 
none  good  but  one,  that  is,  God  :  but  if  thou  wilt 
enter   into   life,  keep  the  commandments.      He 
saith  unto  him,  Whiph  ?     Jesus  said.  Thou  shalt 
do  no  murder,  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery, 
Thou  shalt  not  steal.  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false 
witness.  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother :  and, 
Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.     The 
young  man  saith  unto  him.  All  these  things  have  I 
kept  from  my  youth  up  :  what  lack  I  yet  ?     Jesus 
said  unto  him,  If  thou  wilt  be  perfect,  go  and  sell 
that  thou  hast,  and   give  to  the  poor,  and   thou 
shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven  :  and  come  and  fol- 
low me.     But  when  the  young  man  heard  that 
saying,  he  went  away  sorrowful  :  for  he  had  great 
possessions.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  his  disciples, 
Verily  I  say  unto  you.  That  a  rich  man  shall  hardly 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.     And  again  I 
say  unto  you.  It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through 
the  eye  of  a  needle,  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God.     When  his  disciples 
heard  if,  they  were  exceedingly  amazed,  sapng. 


23 

Wlio  llien  can  be  saved  ?  But  Jesus  beheld  them, 
and  said  unto  them,  Witli  men  this  is  impossible; 
but  with  God  all  things  are  possible.     Then  an- 
swered Peter  and  said  unto  him,  Behold,  we  have 
forsMken   all,  and  followed  thee ;  what  shall  we 
have  therefore  ?     And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Ve- 
rily 1  say  unto  you,  That  ye  which  have  followed 
me,  in  the  regeneration,  when  the  Son  of  man 
shall  sit  in  ihe"throne  of  his  "lory,  ye  also  shall  sit 
upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel.     And  every  one  that  hath  forsaken  houses, 
or  brethren,  or  sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or 
wife,  or  children,  or  lands,  for   my  name's  sake, 
shall    receive  an  hundredfold,  and   shall  inherit 
everlasting  life.     But  many  that  are  first  shall  be 
last ;  and  the  last  shall  be  first. 

*  For  the  kiiiffdom   of  heaven  is  like  unto  a 
man  that  is  an  householder,  which  went  out  early 
in  the  morning  to  hire  labourers  into  his  vineyard. 
And  when  he  had  agreed  with  the  labourers  for  a 
penny  u-day,  he  sent  them  into  his  vineyard.    And 
he  went  out  about  the  third  hour,  and  saw  others 
standing  idle  in  vhe  market-place,  and  said  unto 
them  ;  (Jo  ve  also  into  the  vineyard,  and  whatso- 
ever is  right  I   will  give  you.     And  they  went 
their  way.     Again  he  went  out  about  the  sixth 
and  ninth  hour,  and  did  likewise.     And  about  the 
eleventh  hour  he  went  out,  and  found  others  stand- 
ing idle,  and  saith  unto  them.  Why  stand  ye  here 
all  the  day  idle  ?     They  say  unto  him,  Because 

*  Matthew,  chap.  x\. 


P 


I 


I 


2d 


no  man  hath  hired  us.  He  saith  unto  them,  Go 
ye  also  into  the  vineyard  ;•  and  whatsoever  is  right, 
that  shall  ye  receive.  So  when  even  was  come, 
the  lord  of  the  vineyard  saith  unto  his  steward, 
Call  the  labourers,  and  give  them  their  hire,  be- 
ginning from  the  last  unto  the  first.  And  when 
they  came  that  were  hired  about  the  eleventh  hour, 
they  received  every  man  a  penny.  But  when  the 
first  came,  they  supposed  that  they  should  have 
received  more  ;  and  they  likewise  received  every 
man  a  penny.  And  when  they  had  received  it, 
they  murmured  against  the  goodman  of  the  house, 
saying,  These  last  have  wrought  but  one  hour,  and 
thou  hast  made  them  equal  unto  us,  which  have 
borne  the  burden  and  heat  of  the  day.  But  he 
answered  one  of  them,  and  said,  Friend,  I  do  thee 
no  wrong  :  didst  not  thou  agree  with  me  for  a 
penny?  Take  that  thine  is,  and  go  thy  way:  I 
will  give  unto  this  last,  even  as  unto  thee.  Is  it 
not  lawful  for  mo  to  do  what  I  will  with  mine  own  ? 
Is  thine  eye  evil,  because  I  am  good  ?  So  the 
last  shall  be  first,  and  the  first  last :  for  many  be 
called,  but  few  chosen. 

Then  came  to  him  the  mother  of  Zebedee's 
children  with  her  sons,  worshipping  him,  and  de- 
siring a  certain  thing  of  him.  And  he  said  unto 
her,  What  wilt  thou  ?  She  saith  unto  him.  Grant 
that  these  my  two  sons  may  sit,  the  one  on  thy 
right  hand,  and  the  other  on  the  left,  in  thy  king- 
dom. But  Jesus  answered  and  said.  Ye  know 
not  what  ye  ask.     Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the  cup 


i 


30 

that  I  shall  drink  of,  and  to  be  baptized  with  the 
baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with  ?  They  say  unto 
him,  We  are  able.  And  he  saith  unto  them,  Ye 
shall  drink  indeed  of  my  cup,  and  be  baptized 
with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  with  :  but  to 
sit  on  my  right  hand,  and  on  my  left,  is  not  mine 
to  give,  but  it  shall  be  given  to  theju  for  whom  it 
is  prepared  of  my  Father.  And  when  the  ten 
heard  it,  they  were  moved  with  indignation  against 
the  two  brethren.  But  Jesus  called  them  unto 
hiniy  and  said,  Ye  know  that  the  princes  of  the 
Gentiles  exercise  dominion  over  thrm,  and  they 
that  are  great  exercise  authority  upon  them.  But 
it  shall  not  be  so  among  you:  but  whosoever  will 
be  great  among  you,  let  him  be  your  minister ;  and 
whosoever  will  be  chief  among  you.  let  him  be 
your  servant:  even  as  the  Son  of  man  came  not 
to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give 
his  life  a  ransom  for  many. 

*  And  when  he  was  come  into  the  temple,  the 
chief  priests  and  the  elders  of  the  people  came 
unto  him  as  he  was  teaching,  and  said.  By  what 
authority  doest  thou  these  things?  and  who  gave 
thee  this  authority?  And  Jesus  answered  and 
said  unto  them,  I  also  will  ask  you  one  thing, 
which  if  ye  tell  me,  I  in  like  wise  will  tell  you  by 
what  authority  1  do  these  things.  The  baptism 
of  John,  whence  was  it?  from  heaven,  or  of  men: 
And  thev  reasoned  with  themselves,  sayinir,  If  wc 

■^  Matthew,  chap.  xxi.  5?? 


31 

shall  say,  From  heaven  ;  he  will  say  unto  us,  Why 
did  ye  not  then  believe  him  ?  But  if  we  shall  say 
Of  men;  we  fear  the  people  ;  for  all  hold  John  as 
a  prophet.  And  they  answered  Jesus,  and  said, 
Wc  cannot  tell.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Neither 
tell  I  you  by  what  authority  I  do  these  things. 
But  what  think  ye  ?  A  certain  man  had  two 
sons  ;  and  he  came  to  the  first,  and  said,  Son,  go 
work  to-day  in  my  vineyard.  He  answered  and 
said,  I  will  not :  but  afterward  he  repented,  and 
went.  And  he  came  to  the  second,  and  said  like- 
wise. And  he  answered  and  said,  I  go,  sir ;  and 
went  not.  Whether  of  them  twain  did  the  will 
of  his  father  ?  They  say  unto  him,  The  first. 
Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  That 
the  publicans  and  the  harlots  go  into  the  kingdom 
of  God  before  you.  For  John  came  unto  you  in 
the  way  of  righteousness,  and  ye  believed  him 
not :  but  the  publicans  and  the  harlots  believed 
him :  and  ye,  when  ye  had  seen  it,  repented  not 
afterward,  that  ye  might  believe  him.  Hear  ano- 
ther parable  :  There  was  a  certain  householder, 
which  planted  a  vineyard,  and  hedged  it  round 
about,  and  digged  a  wine-press  in  it,  and  built  a 
tower,  and  let  it  out  to  husbandmen,  and  went  into 
a  far  country  :  and  when  the  time  of  the  fruit 
drew  near,  he  sent  his  servants  to  the  husband- 
men, that  they  might  receive  the  fruits  of  it.  And 
the  husbandmen  took  his  servants,  and  beat  one, 
and  killed  another,  and  stoned  another.  Again, 
he  sent  other  servants   more  tlian  the  first :  and 


\ii 


-Tfmmm^ 


^'J 


they  did  unto  them  likewise.     But  last  of  all  he 
sent  unto  them  his  son,  saying,  They  will  reve- 
rence my  son.     But  when   the  husbandmen  saw 
the  son,  they  said  among  themselves,  This  is  the 
heir;  come,  let  us  kill  him,  and  let  us  seize  on  his 
inheritance.     And  they  caught  him,  and  cast  him 
out  of  the  vineyard,  and  slew  him.     When  the 
lord  therefore  of  the  vineyard  cometh,  what  will 
he  do  unto  those  husbandmen  ?     They  say  unto 
him,  He  will  miserably  destroy  those  wicked  men, 
and  will  let  out  his  vineyard  unto  other  husband- 
men, which  shall  render  him  the  fruits  in  their  sea- 
sons.    Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Did  ye  never  read 
in  the  Scriptures,  The  stone  which  the   builders 
rejected,  the  same  is  become  the  head  of  the  cor- 
ner :  this  is  the  Lord's  doing,  and  it  is  marvellous 
in  our  eyes  ?     Therefore  say  I  unto  you,  The 
kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  from  you,  and 
given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits  thereof. 
And  whosoever  shall  fall  on  this  stone  shall  be 
broken :  but  on  whomsoever  it  shall  fall,  it  will 

grind  him  to  powder. 

*  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  certain 
king,  which  made  a  marriage  for  his  son,  and  sent 
forth  liis  servants  to  call  them  that  were  bidden  to 
the  wedding:  and  they  wouhl  not  come.  Again, 
he  sent  forth  other  servants,  saying,  Tell  them 
which  are  bidden,  Behold,  I  have  prepared  my 
xlinner  :  my  oxen  and  m//  fallings  are  killed,  and 

*  Mattlipw.rliap.  xxii   2. 


3J5 


all  things  are  ready :  come  unto  the  marriage. 
But  they  made  light  of  it,  and  went  their  ways, 
one  to  his  farm,  and  another  to  his  merchandise : 
and  the  remnant  took  his  servants,  and  entreated 
them  spitefully,  and  slew  them.  But  when  the 
king  heard  thereof,  he  was  wToth  :  and  he  sent 
forth  his  armies,  and  destrov^d  those  murderers, 
and  burned  up  their  city.  I'hen  saith  he  to  his 
servants.  The  wedding  is  ready,  but  they  which 
were  bidden  were  not  worthy.  Go  ye  therefore  in- 
to the  highways,  and  as  many  as  ye  shall  find,  bid 
to  the  marriage.  So  those  servants  went  out  into 
the  highways,  and  gathered  together  all  as  many 
as  they  found,  both  bad  and  good  :  and  the  wed- 
ding was  furnished  with  guests.  And  when  the 
king  came  in  to  see  the  guests,  he  saw  there  a 
man  which  had  not  on  a  weddinof  varment :  and 
he  saith  unto  him,  Friend,  how  camest  thou  in 
hither,  not  having  a  wedding  garment?  And  he 
was  speechless.  Then  said  the  king  to  the  ser- 
vants. Bind  him  hand  and  foot,  and  take  him 
away,  and  cast  him  into  outer  darkness ;  there 
shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth. '  For 
many  are  called,  but  few  are  chosen. 

Then  went  the  Pharisees,  and  took  counsel  how 
they  might  entangle  him  in  his  talk.  And  they 
sent  out  unto  him  their  disciples  with  the  Hero- 
dians,  saying,  Master,  we  know  that  thou  art  true, 
and  teachest  the  way  of  God  in  truth,  neither 
carest  thou  for  any  man :  for  thou  regardest  not 
the  person   of  men.     Tell   us,  therefore,   what 

8 


1, 


34 

thinkest  thou  ;  Is  it  lawful  to  give  tribute  unto 
Caesar,  or  not  ?     But  Jesus  perceived  their  wick- 
edness, and  said,  Why  tempt  ye  me.ye  hypocrites? 
Show  me  the  tribute  money.     And  they  brought 
unto  hirii  a  pc  nny.     And  he    saith    unto   them, 
Whose  is  this  image  and  superscription?     They 
say  unto  him,  Cesar's.     Then  saith  he  unto  them, 
Retider  therefore   unto  Caesar  the  things  which 
are  Cesar's ;  and   unto  God   the  things  that  are 
God's-     When  they  had  heard  these  words,  they 
marvelled,  and  left  him,  and  went  their  way. 

The  same  day  came   to  him  the   Sadducees, 
which  say  that  there  is  no  resurrection,  and  asked 
him,  saying,  Master,  Moses  said,  If  a  man  die, 
having  no  chddren,  his  brother  shall  marry  his 
wife,  and  raisr   up  seed  unto  his  brother.     Now 
there  were  with  us  seven  brethren  :  and  the  first, 
when  he  had  married  a  wife,  deceased,  and,  hav- 
ing no  issue,  left  his  wife  unto  his  brother :  like- 
wise the  second  also,  and  the  third,  unto  the  se- 
venth.     And   \h^\   of   all   the    woman   died   also. 
Therefore,  in   the  resurrection,  whose  wife  shall 
she  be  of  the  seven  ?  for  they  all  had  her.     Jesus 
answered  and  said  unto  them.  Ye  do  err,  not  know- 
ing the  ^Scriptures  nor  the  power  of  God.     For  in 
the  resurrection  they  neither  marry,  nor  are  given 
in  marriage, hut  are  as  theangi  Isof  God  in  heaven. 
But  as  touching  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  have 
ye  no^   read  that  which  was  spoken   unto  you  by 
G*  <».  suyinir,  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the 
God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob  ?    God  is  not 


the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living.  And  w  hen 
the  multitude  heard  this,  they  were  astonished  at 
his  doctrine. 

But  when  the  Pharisees  had  heard  that  he  had 
put  the  Sadducees  to  silence,  they  were  gathered 
together.  Then  one  of  them,  who  was  a  Lawyer, 
asked  him  a  question,  tempting  him,  and  saying, 
Master,  which  is  the  great  comma  ml  me  nt  in  the 
law?  Jesus  said  unto  him.  Thou  shall  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind.  This  is  the  first  and 
great  commandment.  And  the  second  is  like  unto 
it.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.  On 
these  two  commandments  hang  all  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets. 

While  the  Pharisees  were  gathered  together, 
Jesus  asked  them,  saying,  What  think  ye  of 
Christ?  whose  son  is  he  ?  They  say  unto  him, 
The  Son  of  David.  He  saith  unto  them,  How 
then  doth  David  in  spirit  call  him  Lord  ?  saying. 
The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Hit  thou  on  my 
right  hand,  till  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool. 
If  David  then  call  him  Lord,  how  is  he  his  son? 
And  no  man  was  able  to  answer  him  a  word,  nei- 
ther durst  any  man  from  that  day  forth  ask  him 
any  more  questions, 

*  Then  spake  Jesus  to  the  multitude,  and  to  his 
disciples,  saying.  The  t^cribes  and  the  Pharisees 
eit  in  Moses'  seat :  all  therefore  whatsoever  they 
bid  you  observe,  that  observe  and  do  ;  but  do  not 

-  Matthew,  chap,  xxiii. 


»  j-^. 


4--^ 


■m      ^ 


li" 


h 


irf 


30 

ye  after  their  works:  for  they  say,  and  do  not. 
For  they  bind  heavy  burdens  and  grievous  to  be 
borne,  and  lay  them  on  men's  shouhlers,  but  they 
themselves  will  not  move  them  with  one  of  their 
fingers.  But  all  their  works  they  do  for  to  be 
seen  of  men:  they  make  broad  their  phylacteries, 
and  enlarge  the  borders  of  their  garments,  and 
love  the  uppermost  rooms  at  feasts,  and  the  chief 
seats  in  the  synagogues,  and  greetings  in  the  mar- 
kets, and  to  be  called  of  men.  Rabbi,  Rabbi.  But 
be  not  ye  called  Rabbi :  for  one  is  your  Master, 
even  Christ ;  and  all  ye  are  brethren.  And  call 
jio  mart  your  father  upon  the  earth :  for  one  is 
your  Father,  who  is  in  heaven.  Neither  be  ye 
called  masters :  for  one  is  your  Master,  even 
Christ.  But  he  that  is  greatest  among  you  shall 
be  your  servant.  And  whosoever  shall  exalt  him- 
self shall  be  abased  ;  and  he  that  shall  humble 
himself  shall  be  exalted.  But  wo  unto  you.  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  hypocrites  !  for  ye  shut  up  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  against  men  :  for  ye  neither  go  in 
yourselves,  neither  suftrr  ye  them  that  are  enter- 
ing to  go  in.  Wo  unto  you.  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites  !  for  ye  devour  widows'  house^s,  and  for 
a  pretence  make  long  prayer  :  therefore  ye  j>hall 
receive  the  greater  damnation.  Wo  unto  you, 
Scribes  and  Ph  risees,  hypocrites!  for  ye  com- 
pass sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte,  and  when 
he  is  made,  ye  make  him  twofold  more  the  child 
of  hell  than  yourselves.  Wo  unto  you,  yt  blind 
guides,  which  say,  Whosoever  shall  swear  by  the 


temple,  it  is  nothing;  but  whosoever  shall  swear 
by  the  gold  of  the  temple,  he  is  a  debtor.      Ye 
fools  and  blind  :  for  whether  is  greater,  the  gold, 
or  the  temple   that  sanctifieth  the  gold  ?     And,' 
whosoever  shall  swear  by  the  altar,  it  is  nothing  J 
but  whosoever  sweareth    by  the  gift  that  is  upon 
It,  he  IS  guilty.      Ye  fools  and  blind  :  for  whether 
IS  greater,  the  gift,  or  the  altar  that  sanctifieth  the 
gift?     Whoso  therefore  shall  swear  by  the  altar, 
sweareth  by  it,  and  by  all  things  thereon.     And 
whoso  shall  swear  by  the  temple,  sweareth  by  it, 
and  by  him  that  dwelleth  therein.     And  he  that 
shall  swear  by  heaven,  sweareth  by  the  throne  of 
God,  and  by  him  that  sitteth  thereon.     Wo  unto 
you.   Scribes  and   Pharisees,  hypocrites!    for  ye 
pay  tithe  of  mint  and  anise  and  cummin,  and  have 
omitted  the  weightier  mntters  of  the  law,  judg- 
ment, mercy,  and   faith  :  these  ought  ye  to  have 
done,  and  not  to  leave    the  other  undone.      Ye 
blind  guides,  which  strain  at  a  gnat,  and  swallow 
a  camel.     Wo   unto  you.  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites!    ,*   yc  make  clean  the  outside  of  the 
cup  and  of  the  platter,  but  within  they  are  full  of 
extortion    inid    excess.       Thou    blind    Pharisee, 
clease  first  that  tchirh  is  within  the  cup  and  plat- 
ter, that  the  outside  of  them   may  be  clean  also. 
Wo  unto  you,  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites  ! 
for  ye  are  like  unto  wliited  sepulchres,  which  in- 
deed appear  beautiful  outward,  but  are  within  full 
of  dead   men's    bones,    and    of   all    i.ncleanness. 
Even  so  ye  outwardly  appear  righteous  unto  men. 


); 


k\ 


L 


»'  t 


38 


but  within  ye  are  full  of  hypocrisy  and  iniquity. 
Wo  unto  you,  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites ! 
because  ye  build  the  tombs  of  the  prophets,  and 
garnish  the  sepulchres  of  the  righteous,  and  say, 
If  we  had  been  in  the  days  of  our  fathers,  we 
would  not  have  been  partakers  with  them  in  the 
blood  of  the  prophets.  Wherefore  ye  be  witnesses 
unto  yourselves,  that  ye  are  the  children  of  them 
which  killed  the  prophets.  Fill  ye  up  then  the 
measure  of  your  fathers.  Ye  serpents,  ye  gene- 
ration of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the  damna- 
tion of  hell  ?  Wherefore,  behold,  I  send  unto 
you  prophets,  and  wise  men,  and  scribes  :  and 
some  of  them  ye  shall  kill  and  crucify  ;  and  some 
of  them  shall  ye  scourge  in  your  synagogues,  and 
persecute  them  from  city  to  city :  that  upon  you 
may  come  all  the  righteous  blood  shed  upon  the 
earth,  from  the  blood  of  righteous  Abel  unto  the 
blood  of  Zacharias  son  of  Barachias,  whom  ye 
slew  between  the  temple  and  the  altar.  Verily  I 
say  unto  you,  All  these  things  shall  come  upon 
this  generation.  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou 
that  killest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them  which 
are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would  I  have  gather- 
ed thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth 
her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not! 
Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate.  For 
I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall  not  see  me  henceforth, 
till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  he  that  comeih  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord. 

*  Watch  therefore  ;  for  ye  know  not  what  hour 

*  Matthew,  chap.  xril.  42. 


4 


your  Lord  doth  come.     But  know  this,  that  if  the 
good  man  of  the  house  had  known  in  what  watch 
the  th.ef  would  come,  he  would  have  watched, 
and   would    not  have  suffered  his   house  to  be 
broken  up.     Therefore  be  ye  also  ready :  for  in 
such  an  hour  as  ye  think  not  the  Son  of  man  com- 
eth.     Who  then  is  a  faithful  and  wise  servant, 
whom  h,s  lord  hath  made  ruler  over  his  household, 
to  give  them  meat  in  due  season  ?     Blessed  is 
that  servant,  whom  his  lord  when  he  cometh  shall 
find  so  doing.     Verily  I  say  unto  you.  That  he 
shall  make  h.m  ruler  over  all  his  goods.     But  and 
If  hat  evil  servant  shall  say  in  his  heart,  My  lord 
de  ayeth  his  coming ;  and  shall  begin  to  smite  his 
fellow-servants,  and   to   eat    and   drink  with  the 
drunken  ;  the  lord  of  that  servant  shall  come  in  a 
day  when  he  looketh  not  for  him,  and  in  an  hour 
that  he  IS  not  aware  of,  and  shall  cut  him  asunder, 
and  appoint  him  his  portion  with  the  hypocrites  • 
there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth.      ' 
Then  shall  the  kingdom  of  heaven  be  liken- 
ed unto  ten  virgins,  which  took  their  lamps,  and 
went  forth  to  meet  the  bridegroom.     And  five  of 
them  were  wise,  and  five  were  foolish.     They  that 
were  foolish  took  their  lamps,  and  took  no  oil  with 
them;  but  the  wise  took  oi!  i.,   their  vessels  with 
their  lamps.     While  the  bridegroom  tarried,  they 
all  slumbered  an.l  slept.     And  at  midnight  there 
was  a  cry  made.  Behold  the  bridegroom  cometh  • 
go  ye  out  to  meet  him.     Then  all  those  virgins 

"^  Matthew,  chap.  xTv. 


^1 


i 


I 


4U 


arose,  and  trimmed  their  lamps.  And  the  foolish 
said  unto  the  wise,  Give  us  of  your  oil ;  for  our 
lamps  are  gone  out.  But  the  wise  answered,  say- 
ing, Not  so ;  lest  there  be  not  enough  for  us  and 
you  :  but  go  ye  rathnr  to  them  that  sell,  and  buy 
for  yourselves.  And  while  they  went  to  buy,  the 
bridegroom  came  ;  and  they  that  were  ready  went 
in  with  him  to  the  marriage  :  and  the  door  was 
shut.  Afterward  came  also  the  other  virgins, 
saying,  Lord,  Lord,  open  to  us.  But  he  answer- 
ed and  said,  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  know  you  not. 
Watch  therefore,  for  ye  know  neither  the  day  nor 
the  hour  wherein  the  Son  of  man  cometh.  For 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  as  a  man  travelling  into 
a  far  country,  who  called  his  own  servants,  and 
delivered  unto  them  his  goods.  And  unto  one  he 
gave  five  talents,  to  another  two,  and  to  another 
one  ;  to  every  man  according  to  his  several  abi- 
lity; and  straightway  took  his  journey.  Then  he 
that  had  received  the  five  talents  wc^ntand  traded 
with  the  same,  and  made  them  other  five  talents. 
And  likewise  he  that  had  recnred  two,  he  also 
ffained  other  two.  But  he  that  received  one  went 
and  digged  in  tho  earth,  and  hid  his  lord's  money. 
After  a  long  time  the  hird  of  those  servants  com- 
eth, and  reckoneth  with  them.  And  so  he  that 
liad  received  live  talents  came  and  brought  other 
five  talents,  saying,  Lord,  thou  doliveredst  unto 
me  five  talents :  behold,  I  have  gained  besides 
them  five  talents  more.  His  lord  said  unto  him, 
Well  done,  thou  cood  and  faithful  servant :  thou 


tl 


!  i 


hast  been  faithful  over  a  few  things,  I  will  make 
thee  ruler  over  many   things:   enter  thou   into 
the  joy  of  thy  lord.     He  also  that  had  received 
two  talents  came  and  said,  Lord,  thou  deliveredst 
unto  me  two  talents :  behold,  I  have  gained  two 
other  talents  besides  them.     His  lord  said  unto 
him,  Weil  done,  good  and  faithful  servant ;  thou 
hast  been  faithful  over  a  few  things,  I  will  make 
thee  ruler  over  many  things  :  enter  thou  into  the 
joy  of  thy  lord.     Then  he  which  had  received  the 
one  talent  came  and  said,  Lord,  I  knew  thee  that 
thou  art  a  hard  man,  reaping  where  thou  hast  not 
sown,  and  gathering  where  thou  hast  not  strawed  : 
and  I  was  afraid,  and  %vent  and  hid  thy  talent  in 
the  earth  :  lo,  there  thou  hast  that  is  thine.     His 
lord  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Thou  wicked 
nnd  slothful  servant,  thou  knewest   that  I  reap 
where  I  sowed  not,  and  gather  where  I  have  not 
strawed :  thou  oughtest  therefore  to  have  put  my 
money  to  the  exchangers,  and  then  at  my  coming 
I  should   have  received   mine  own    with  usury. 
Take  therefore  the  talent  from  him,  and  give  it 
unto  him  which  hath  ten  talents.     For  unto  every 
one  that  hath  shall  be  given,  and  he  shall  have 
abundance:  but  from  him  that  hath  not, shall  be 
taken  away  even  that  which  he  hath.     And  cast 
ye  the  unprofitable  servant  into  outer  darkness  : 
there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth! 
When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory, 
and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit 
upon  the  throne  of  his  glorv :  and  before   him 

9 


42 


shall  be  gathered  all  nations  :  and  he  shall  sepa- 
rate them  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth 
his  sheep  from  the  goats :  and  he  shall  set  the 
sheep  on  his  right  hand,  but  the  goats  on  the  left. 
Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right 
hand,  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the 
kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world  :  for  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave 
me  meat :  I  was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink  :  I 
was  a  stranger,  and  ye  took  me  in  :  naked,  and  ye 
clothed  me  :  I  was  sick,  and  ye  visited  me  :  I  was 
in  prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me.  Then  shall  the 
righteous  answer  him,  saying,  Lord,  when  saw  we 
thee  an  hungered,  and  fed  thee  ?  or  thirsty,  and 
gave  <Aec  drink  ?  When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger, 
and  took  thee  in  ?  or  naked,  and  clothed  thee  ? 
Or  when  saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came 
unto  thee?  And  the  king  shall  answer  and  say 
unto  them.  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Inasmuch  as  ye 
have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these  my 
brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me.  Then  shall  he 
say  also  unto  them  on  the  left  hand.  Depart  from 
me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  his  angels  :  for  I  was  an  hungered, 
and  ye  gave  me  no  meat :  I  was  thirsty,  and  ye 
gave  me  no  drink :  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye  took 
me  not  in :  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me  not :  sick, 
and  in  prison,  and  ye  visited  me  not.  Then  shall 
they  also  answer  him,  saying.  Lord,  when  saw  we 
ihee  an  hungered,  or  athirst,  or  a  stranger,  or 
naked,  or  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  did  not  minister 


unto  thee  ?  Then  shall  he  answer  them,  saying, 
Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it  not  to 
one  of  the  least  of  these,  ye  did  it  not  to  me.  And 
these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment : 
but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal. 

*  And  it  came  to  pass,  that,  as  Jesus  sat  at  meat 
m  his  house,  many  publicans  and  sinners  sat  also 
together  with  Jesus  and  his  disciples  :  for  there 
were  many,  and  they  followed  him.     And  when 
the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  saw  him  eat  with  publi- 
cans and  sinners,  they   said  unto  his   disciples, 
How  is  it  that  he  eateth  and  drinketh  with  publi- 
cans and  sinners  ?     When  Jesus  heard  it,  he  saith 
unto  them.  They  that  are  whole  have  no  need  of 
the  physician,  but  they  that  are  sick :  I  came  not 
to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance. 
And  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  Pharisees 
used  to  fast:  and  they  come  and  say  unto  him, 
Why  do  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  Phari- 
sees fast,  but  thy  disciples  fast  not  ?     And  Jesus 
said  unto  them.  Can  the  children  of  the  bride- 
chamber  fast,  while  the  bridegroom  is  with  them  ? 
As  long  as  they  have  the  bridegroom  with  them, 
they  cannot  fast.     But  the  days  will  come,  when 
the  bridegroom  shall  be  taken  away  from  them, 
and  then  shall  they  fast  in  those  days.     No  man 
also  seweth  a  piece  of  new  cloth   on  an  old  gar- 
ment :  else  the  new  piece  that  filled  it  up  taketh 
away  from  the  old,  and  the  rent  is  made  worse. 
And  no   man  puitoth  new  wine  into  old  bottles: 

*   ^T?^k.  chap  ii.  15. 


<"%. 


44 

else  the  new  wine  doth  burst  the  bottles,  and  the 
wine  is  spilled,  and  the  bottles  will  be  marred :  but 
new  wine  must  be  put  into  new  bottles. 

And  it  came  to  pass,  that  he  went  through  the 
corn-fields  on  the  Sabbath-day ;  and  his  disciples 
began,  as  they  went,  to  pluck  the  ears  of  corn. 
And  the  Pharisees  said  unto  him.  Behold,  why  do 
they  on  the  Sabbath-day  that  which  is  not  lawful  ? 
And  he  said  unto  them,  Have  ye  never  read  what 
David  did,  when  he  had  need,  and  was  an  hun- 
gered, he,  and  they  that  were  with  him  ?  How 
he  went  into  the  house  of  God  in  the  days  of 
Abiather  the  High  Priest,  and  did  eat  the  shew- 
bread,  which  is  not  lawful  to  eat  but  for  the  Priests, 
and  gave  also  to  them  which  were  with  him  ?  And 
he  said  unto  them,  The  Sabbath  was  made  for 
man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath  :  therefore  the 
Son  of  man  is  Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath. 

*  There  came  then  his  brethren  and  his  mother, 
and,  standing  without,  sent  unto  him,  calling  him. 
And  the  multitude  sat  about  him,  and  they  said 
unto  him.  Behold,  thy  mother  and  thy  brethren 
without  seek  for  thee.  And  he  answered  them, 
saying.  Who  is  my  mother,  or  my  brethren  ?  And 
he  looked  round  about  on  them,  and  said.  Behold 
my  mother  and  my  brethren  !  For  whosoever  shall 
do  the  will  of  God,  the  same  is  my  brother,  and 
my  sister,  and  mother. 

t  And  he  taught  them. many  things  by  parables, 
and  said  unto  them  in  his  doctrine,  Hearken  ;  Be- 

*  Mark,  chap.  iii.  SI.  f  Mark,  chap.  iv.  2. 


n 


45 

liold,  there  went  out  a  sower  to  sow  :  and  it  came 
to  pass,  as  he  sowed,  some  felJ  by  the  way  side 
and  the  fowls  «f  the  air  came  and  devoured  it  up' 
And  some  fell  on  stony  ground,  where  it  had  not 
much  earth  :  and   immediately  it  sprang  up,  be- 
cause u  had  no  depth  of  earth  :  but  when  the  sun 
was  up,  ,t  was  scorched  ;  and  because  it  had  no 
root,  It  withered  away.     And  some  fell  among 
thorns,  and  the  thorns  grew  up,  and  choked  it,  and 
It  yielded  no  fruit.  And  other  fell  on  good  ground, 
and  did  yield  fruit  that  sprang  up  and  increased  : 
and  brought  forth,  some  thirty,  and  some  sixty, 
and  some  an  hundred.     And  he  said  unto  them, 
He  that  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.     And 
when  he  was  alone,  they  that  were  about  him  with 
the  twelve  asked  of  him  the  parable.     And  he 
said  unto  them.  Unto  you  it  is  given  to  know  the 
mystery  of  the  kingdom  of  God  :  but  unto  them 
that  are  without,  all   these  things  are  done  in  pa- 
rables :  That  seeing  they  may  see,  and  not  per- 
ceive;  and  hearing  they  may  hear,  and  not  under- 
stand ;  lest  at  any  time  they  should  be  converted, 
and  t/irir  sins  should  be  forgiven  them.     And  he 
said  unto  them.  Know  ye  not  this  parable.?  and 
how  then  will  ye  know  all  parables  ?     The  sower 
soweth  the  word.     And  these  are  they  by  the  way 
side,  where  the  word  is  sown ;  but    when   they 
have    heard,   Satan    cometh    immediately,    and 
taketh  away  the  word  that  was  sown  in   their 
hearts.     And  these  are  they  likewise  which  are 
sown  on   stony  ground ;   who,   when  thev  have 


rl 


4G 


heard  the  word,  immediately  receive  it  with  glad- 
ness :  and  have  no  root  in  themselves,  and  so  en- 
dure but  for  a  time  :  afterward,  when  affliction  or 
persecution  ariseth  for  the  word's  sake,  imme- 
diately they  are  offended.  And  these  are  they 
which  are  sown  among  thorns  ;  such  as  hear  the 
word,  and  the  cares  of  this  world,  and  the  deceit- 
fulness  of  riches,  and  the  lusts  of  other  things  en- 
tering in,  choke  the  word,  and  it  becometh  un- 
fruitful. And  these  are  they  which  are  sown  in 
good  ground  ;  such  as  hear  the  word,  and  receive 
it,  and  bring  forth  fruit,  some  thirtyfold,  some 
sixty,  and  some  an  hundred.  And  he  said  unto 
them.  Is  a  candle  brought  to  be  put  under  a  bushel, 
or  under  a  bed,  and  not  to  be  set  on  a  candlestick  ? 
For  there  is  nothing  hid,  which  shall  not  be  mani- 
fested ;  neither  was  any  thing  kept  secret,  but 
that  it  should  come  abroad.  If  any  man  have 
ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.  And  he  saith  unto 
them.  Take  heed  what  ye  hear :  with  what  mea- 
sure ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured  to  you :  and 
unto  you  that  hear  shall  more  be  given.  For  he 
that  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given  :  and  he  that  hath 
not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  even  that  which  he 
hath.  And  he  said.  So  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  as 
if  a  man  should  cast  seed  into  the  ground  ;  and 
should  sleep,  and  rise  night  and  day,  and  the  seed 
should  spring  and  grow  up,  he  knoweth  not  how. 
For  the  earth  bringeth  forth  fruit  of  herself;  first 
the  blade,  then  ihe  ear,  after  that  the  full  corn  in 
iIt  trcir      h\\\  ub'^r  ♦'-  brouffhr  forth,  un- 


I 


mediately  he  putteth  in  the  sickle,  because  the 
harvest  is  come.  And  he  said,  Whereunto  shall 
we  liken  the  kingdom  of  God  ?  or  with  what  com- 
parison shall  we  compare  it  ?  It  is  like  a  grain 
of  mustard  seed,  which,  when  it  is  sown  in  the 
earth,  is  less  than  all  the  seeds  that  be  in  the 
earth:  but  when  it  is  sown,  it  groweth  up,  and 
becometh  greater  than  all  the  herbs,  and  shooteth 
out  great  branches  ;  so  that  the  fowls  of  the  air 
may  lodge  under  the  shadow  of  it. 

*  Then  the   Pharisees  and   Scribes  asked  him 
Why  walk  not  thy  disciples  according  to  the  tra- 
dition of  the  elders,  but  eat  bread  with  unwashen 
hands  ?    He  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Well 
hath  Esaias  prophesied  of  you  hypocrites,  as  it  is 
written,  This  people  honoureth  me  with  their  \\r,s, 
but  their  heart  is  far  from  me.     Howbeit,  in  vain 
do  they  worship  me,  teaching  for  doctrines  the 
commandments  of  men.     For,  laying   aside  the 
commandment  of  God,  ye  hold  the  tradition   of 
men,  as  the  washing  of  pots  and  cups :  and  many 
other  such  like  things  ye  do.     And  he  said  unto 
them,  Full  well  ye  reject  the  commandment  of 
God,  that  ye  may  keep  your  own  tradition.     For 
Moses  said,   Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother 
and    Whoso  curseth  father  or  mother,  let  him  die 
the  death  :  but  ye  say.  If  a  man  shall  say  to  his 
father  or  mother.  It  is  Corban,  that  is  to  say,  a 
gift,  by  whatsoever  thou  mightest  be  profitted  by 
me  ;  he  shall  be  free.     And  ye  suffer  him  no  more 

*  Mark,  chap.  vii.  [5.]  c. 


w 


I 


M 


4U 

to  do  aught  for  his  father  or  his  mother  ;  making 
the  word  of  God  of  none  effect  through  your  tra- 
dition, which  ye  have   delivered:  and  many  such 
like  things  do  ye.     And   when  he  had  called  all 
the  people  uttto  him,  he  said  unto  them,  Hearken 
unto  me  every  one  of  you,  and  understand  :  there 
is  nothing  from  without  a  man,  that  entering  into 
him  can  defile  him  :  but  the  things  which  come 
out  of  him,  those  are  they  that  defile  the  man.    If 
any  man  have  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.     And 
when  he  was  entered  into  the  house  from  the  peo- 
ple, his  disciples  asked  him  concerning  the  para- 
ble.    And  he  saiih  unto  them.  Are  ye  so  without 
understanding  also?     Do  ye  not  perceive,  that 
whatsoever  thing  from  without  entereth  into  the 
man,  it  cannot  defile  him ;  because  it  entereth  not 
into  his  heart,  but  into  the  belly,  and  goeth  out 
into  the  draught,  purging  all  meats  !  And  he  said, 
That  which  cometh  out  of  the  man,  that  defileth 
the  man.     For  from  within,  out  of  the  heart  of 
men,  proceed  evil  thoughts,  adulteries,  fornica- 
tions, murders,  thefts,  covetousness,  wickedness, 
deceit,    lasciviousness,    an  evil  eye,    blasphemy, 
pride,  foolishness :  all  these  evil  things  come  from 
within,  and  defile  the  man. 

*  And  when  he  had  called  the  people  unto  him, 
with  his  disciples  also,  he  said  unto  them.  Who- 
soever will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself, 
and  take  up  his  cross,  and  follow  me.  For  who- 
soever will  save  his  life  shall  lose  it ;  but  whoso- 

*  Mark, chap.  viii.  84. 


I 


49 

ever  shall  lose  his  life  for  my  sake  and  the  Gos- 
pel's, the  same  shall  save  it.  For  what  shall  it 
profit  a  man,  if  he  shall  gain  the  whole  world,  and 
lose  his  own  soul  ?  Or  what  shall  a  man  give  in 
exchange  for  his  soul  ?  Whosoever  therefore  shall 
be  ashamed  of  me  and  of  my  words  in  this  adul- 
terous and  sinful  generation  ;  of  him  also  shall  the 
Son  of  man  be  ashamed,  when  he  cometh  in  the 
glory  of  his  Father  with  the  holy  angels. 

*  And  he  came  to  Capernaum  :  and  being  in 
the  house  he  asked  them,  What  was  it  that  ye 
disputed  among  yourselves  by  the  way  ?  But  they 
held  their  peace  :  for  by  the  way  they  had  dis- 
puted among  themselves,  who  ^AowW  6^  the  great- 
est.    And  he  sat  down,  and  called  the  twelve,  and 
saith  unto  them.  If  any  man  desire  to  be  first,  the 
same  shall  be  last  of  all,  and  servant  of  all.    And 
he  took  a  child,  and  set  him  in  the  midst  of  them: 
and  when  he  had  taken  him  into  his  arms,  he  said 
unto  them,  Whosoever  shall  receive  one  of  such 
children  in  my  name,  receiveth  me  :  and  whoso- 
ever shall  receive  me,  receiveth  not  me,  but  him 
that  sent  me. 

And  John  answered  him,  saying.  Master,  we 
saw  one  casting  out  devils  in  thy  name,  and  he 
followeth  not  us  :  and  we  forbad  him,  because  he 
followeth  not  us.  But  Jesus  said.  Forbid  him 
not :  for  there  is  no  man  which  shall  do  a  miracle 
in  my  name,  that  can  lightly  speak  evil  of  me. 
For  he  that  is  not  against  us  is  on  our  part. 

*  Mark,  chap.  ix.  SS. 

10 


s 


i  I 


f'1 


50 

whosoever  shall  give  you  a  cup  of  water  to  drink 
in  my  name,  because  ye  belong  to  Christ,  verily  I 
say  unto  you,  he  shall  not  lose  his  reward.  And 
whosoever  shall  offend  one  of  these  little  ones  that 
believe  in  me,  it  is  better  for  him  that  a  millstone 
were  hanged  about  his  neck,  and  he  were  cast  into 
the  sea.  And  if  thy  hand  offend  thee,  cut  it  off: 
it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  maimed,  than 
having  two  hands  to  go  into  hell,  into  the  fire  that 
never  shall  be  quenched  :  where  their  worm  dieth 
not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.  And  if  thy  foot 
oflend  thee,  cut  it  off:  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter 
halt  into  life,  than  having  two  feet  to  be  cast  into 
hell,  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched : 
where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched.  And  if  thine  eye  offend  thee,  pluck 
it  out :  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God  with  one  eye,  than  having  two  eyes 
to  be  cast  into  hell  fire :  where  their  worm  dieth 
not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.  For  every  one 
shall  be  salted  with  fire,  and  every  sacrifice  shall 
be  salted  w^ith  salt.  Salt  is  good  ;  but  if  the  salt 
have  lost  its  saltness,  wherewith  will  ye  season  it  ? 
Have  salt  in  yourselves,  and  have  peace  one  with 
another. 

*  And  they  brought  young  children  to  him,  that 
he  should  touch  them  :  and  his  disciples  rebuked 
those  that  brought  them.  But  when  Jesus  saw  ity 
he  was  much  displeased,  and  said  unto  them.  Suf- 
fer the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid 


.yt. 


Mark,  chap.  x.  13. 


I 


51 

them  not ;  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Whosoever  shall  not  receive 
the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child,  he  shall  not 
enter  therein.  And  he  took  them  up  in  his  arms, 
put  his  hands  upon  them,  and  blessed  them. 

And  when  he  was  gone  forth  into  the  way,  there 
came  one  running,  and  kneeled  to  him,  and  asked 
him.  Good  Master,  what  shall  I  do  that  I  may  in- 
herit eternal  life  ?    And  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Why 
callest  thou  me  good  ?  there  is  none  good  but  one, 
that  is,  God.     Thou  knowest  the  commandments. 
Do  not  commit  adultery.  Do  not  kill.  Do  not  steal, 
Do  not  bear  false  witness.  Defraud  not.  Honour 
thy  father  and  mother.     And  he  answered  and 
said  unto  him,  Master,  all  these  have  I  observed 
from  my  youth.     Then  Jesus  beholding  him  loved 
him,  and  said  unto  him.  One  thing  thou  lackest: 
go  thy  way,  sell  whatsoever  thou  hast,  and  give  to 
the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven  : 
and  come,  take  up  the  cross,  and  follow  me.    And 
he  was  sad  at  that  saying,  and  went  away  griev- 
ed :  for  he   had   great   possessions.     And  Jesus 
looked  round  about,  and  saith  unto  his  disciples. 
How  hardly  shall  they  that  have  riches  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God  !     And  the  discip  leswer  e 
astonished  at  his  words.     But  Jesus  answereth 
again,  and  saith  unto  them.  Children,  how  hard  is 
it  for  them  that  trust  in  riches  to  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God  !     It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go 
through  the  eye  of  a  needle,  than  for  a  rich  man 
to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.     And   they 


ii 


I- 1 


52 


were  astonished  out  of  measure,  saying  among 
themselves,  Who  then  can  be  jsaved  ?  And  Jesus 
looking  upon  them  saith,  With  men  it  is  impossi- 
ble, but  not  with  God  :  for  with  God  all  things 
are  possible.  Then  Peter  began  to  say  unto  him, 
Lo,  we  have  left  all,  and  have  followed  thee.  And 
Jesus  answered  and  said.  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
There  is  no  man  that  hath  left  house,  or  brethren, 
or  sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or  chil* 
dren,  or  lands,  for  my  sake,  and  the  gospel's,  but 
he  shall  receive  an  hundredfold  now  in  this  time, 
houses,  and  brethren,  and  sisters,  and  mothers, 
and  children,  and  lands,  with  persecutions  ;  and 
in  the  world  to  come  eternal  life.  But  many  that 
are  first  shall  be  last ;  and  the  last  first. 

*  And  James  and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee, 
come  unto  him,  saying,  Master,  we  would  that 
thou  shouldest  do  for  us  whatsoever  we  shall  de- 
sire. And  he  said  unto  them.  What  would  ye 
that  I  should  do  for  you  ?  They  said  unto  him, 
Grant  unto  us  that  we  may  sit,  one  on  thy  right 
hand,  and  the  other  on  thy  left  liand,  in  thy  glory. 
But  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Ye  know  not  what  ye 
ask  :  can  ye  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  of?  and 
be  baptized  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized 
with  ?  And  they  said  unto  him.  We  can.  And 
Jesus  said  unto  them.  Ye  shall  indeed  drink  of 
the  cup  that  I  drink  of;  and  with  the  baptism  that 
I  am  baptized  with  shall  ye  be  baptized  :  but  to 
sit  on  my  right  hand  and  on  my  left  hand  is  not 

*  Mark,  chap,  x.  35. 


I 


I 


53 

mine  to  give ;  but  it  shall  be  given  to  them  for 
whom  It  IS  prepared.     And  when  the  ten  heard  it 
they  began  to  be  much  displeased  with  James  and 
John.     But  Jesus  called  them  to  him,  and  saith 
unto  them,  Ye  know  that  they  which  are  account- 
ed to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  exercise  lordship  over 
them  ;  and    their  great   ones   exercise  authority 
upon  them.     But  so  shall  it  not  be  among  you  • 
but  whosoever  will  be  great  among  you,  shall  be 
yourmmistor:  and  whosoever  of  you  will  be  the 
chi..fesi,  shall  be  servant,  of  all.     For  even  the 
i^'on  of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto    but 
to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  m'any. 
Therefore  I  say  unto  you,  What  things  so- 
ever ye  desire,  when  ye  pray,  believe  that  ye  re- 
ceive them,  and  ye  shall  have  them.     And  when 
ye  stand  praying,  forgive,  if  ye  have  aught  against 
any :  that  your  Father  also  which  is  in  heaven 
may   forgive  you  your  trespasses.     But  if  ye  do 
not  forgive,  neither  will  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven  forgive  your  trespasses. 

t  And  they  send  unto  him  certain  of  the  Pha- 
risees and  of  the  IJerodians,  to  catch  him  in  his 
words.  And  when  they  were  come,  they  say 
unto  hm..  Master,  we  know  that  thou  art  true,  and 
carest  for  no  man  :  for  thou  regardest  not  the  per- 
son of  men,  but  teachest  the  way  of  God  in  truth  : 
Is  It  lawful  to  give  tribute  to  Cajsar,  or  not  ?  Shall 
we  give,  or  shall  we  not  give  ?  But  he,  knowincr 
their  hypocrisy,  said  unto  them,  Why  tempt  ve 


I 


♦  Mark,  chap.  xi.  24. 


\i 


f  Mark,  chap.xii.  IS. 


i 


I 


f  I 

Iff 


54 

me  ?     Bring  me  a  penny,  that  I  may  see  it    And 
they  brought  it.     And  he  saith  unto  them,  Whose 
is  this  image  and  superscription  ?     And  they  said 
unto  him,  Caesar's.     And  Jesus  answering  said 
unto  them,  Render  to  Caesar  the  things  that  are 
Caesar's,  and  to  God  the  things  that  are  God's. 
And  they  marvelled  at  him.     Then  come  unto 
him  the  Sadducees,  which  say  there  is  no  resur- 
rection :  and  they  asked  him,  saying.  Master,  Mo- 
ses wrote  unto  us.  If  a  man's  brother  die,  and 
leave  his  wife  behind  him,  and  leave  no  children, 
that  his  brother  should  take  his  wife,  and  raise  up 
seed  unto  his  brother.     Now  there  were  seven 
brethren  :  and  the  first  took  a  wife,  and   dying 
left  no  seed.     And  the  second  took  her,  and  died, 
neither  left  he  any  seed :  and  the  third  likewise. 
And  the  seven  had  her,  and  left  no  seed  :  last  of 
all  the  woman  died   also.     In  the  resurrection, 
therefore,  when   they  shall  rise,  whose  wife  shall 
she  be  of  them  ?  for  the  seven  had  her  to  wife. 
And  Jesus  answering  said  unto  them.  Do  ye  not 
therefore  err,  because  ye  know  not  the  Scriptures, 
neither  the  power  of  God  ?     For  when  they  shall 
rise  from  the  dead,  they  neither  marry,  nor  are 
given  in  marriage ;  but  are  as  the  angels  which 
are  in  heaven.     And   as  touching  the  dead,  that 
they  rise  :  have  ye  not  read  in  the  book  of  Mcses, 
how  in  the  bush  God  spake  unto  him,  saying,  I  am 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and 
the  God  of  Jacob  ?     He  is  not  the  God  of  the 
dead,  but  the  God  of  the  living  :  ye  therefore  do 


55 


greatly  err.     And  one  of  the  Scribes  came,  and 
having  heard  them  reasoning  together,  and  per- 
ceiving that  he  had   answered  them  well,  asked 
him,  Which  is  the  first  commandment  of  all  ?  And 
Jesus  answered  him,  The  first   of  all  the  com- 
mandments is,  Hear,  O  Israel ;    The  Lord  our 
God  IS  one  Lord  :  and  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and 
with  all  thy  mind,  and  with  all  thy  strength  :  this 
IS  the  first  commandment.     And  the  second  is 
like,  namely  this,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour 
as  thyself.     There  is  none  other  commandment 
greater  than   these.     And  the  Scribe  said  unto 
him.  Well,  Master,  thou  hast  said  the  truth :  for 
there  is  one  God ;  and  there  is  none  other  but 
he:  and  to  love  him  with  all  the  heart,  and  with 
all  the  understanding,  and  with  all  the  soul,  and 
with  all  the  strength,  and  to  love  his  neighbour  as 
himself,  is  more  than  all  whole-burnt  offerings 
and  sacrifices.     And  when  Jesus  saw  that  he  an- 
swered discreetly,  he  said  unto  him,  Thou  art  not 
far  from  the  kingdom  of  God.     And  no  man  after 
that  durst  ask  him  any  questions, 

*  And  Jesus  sat  over  against  tlie  treasury,  and 
beheld  how  the  people  cast  money  into  the  trea- 
sury :  and  many  that  were  rich  cast  in  much.  And 
there  came  a  certain  poor  widow,  and  she  threw 
in  two  mites,  which  make  a  farthing.  And  he 
called  unto  him  his  disciples,  and  saith  unto  them, 
Verily  I  say  unto  you.  That  this  poor  widow  hatli 

*  Mark,chap.  xi.  [xii.]  41. 


V\ 


t 


50 

cast  more  in,  tlian  all  they  which  have  cast  into 
the  treasury :  for  all  theij  did  cast  in  of  their  abun- 
dance ;  but  she  of  her  want  did  cast  in  all  that 
she  had,  even  all  her  living. 

*  And  he  came  to  Nazareth,  where  he  had  been 
brought  up :  and,  as  his  custom  was,  he  went  into 
the  synagogue  on  the  sabbath-day,  and  stood  up 
for  to  read.  And  there  was  delivered  unto  him 
the  book  of  the  prophet  Esaias.  And  when  he 
had  opened  the  book,  he  found  the  place  where  it 
was  written.  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me, 
because  he  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  the  Gos- 
pel to  the  poor;  he  hath  sent  me  to  heal  the  broken- 
hearted, to  preach  deliverance  to  the  captives, 
and  recovering  of  sight  to  the  blind,  to  set  at 
liberty  them  that  are  bruised,  to  preach  the  accept- 
able year  of  the  Lord.  And  he  closed  the  book, 
and  he  gave  it  again  to  the  minister,  and  sat  down. 
And  the  eyes  of  all  them  that  were  in  the  syna- 
gogue were  fastened  on  him.  And  he  began  to 
say  unto  them.  This  day  is  this  scripture  fulfilled 
in  your  ears.  And  all  bare  him  witness,  and 
wondered  at  the  gracious  words  which  proceeded 
out  of  his  mouth.  And  they  said.  Is  not  this  Jo- 
seph's son  ?  And  he  said  unto  them.  Ye  will 
surely  say  unto  me  this  proverb.  Physician,  heal 
thyself:  whatsoever  we  have  heard  done  in  Ca- 
pernaum, do  also  here  in  thy  country.  And  he 
said,  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  No  prophet  is  accept- 
ed in  his  own  country.     But  I  tell  you  of  a  truth, 

*  Luke,  chap,  iv,  16. 


5/ 


i 


many  widows  were  in  Israel  in  the  days  of  Elias, 
when  the  heaven  was  shut  up  three  years  and 
six  months,  when  great  famine  was  throughout  all 
the  land  :  but  unto  none  of  them  was  Elias  sent, 
save  unto  Sarepta,  a  city  of  Sidon,  unto  a  woman 
that  was  a  widow.  And  many  lepers  were  in 
Israel  in  the  time  of  Eliseus  the  prophet  ;  and 
none  of  them  was  cleansed  saving  Naaman  the 
Syrian. 

*  But  their  Scribes  and  Pharisees  murmured 
against  his  disciples,  saying.  Why  do  ye  eat  and 
drink  with  publicans  and  sinners  ?  And  .Jesus  an- 
swering said  unto  them,  they  that  are  whole  need 
not  a  physician  ;  but  they  that  are  sick.     I  came 
not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance. 
And  he  spake  also  a  parable  unto  them  ;  No  man 
putteth  a  piece  of  a  new  garment  upon  an  old  ;  if 
otherwise,  then  both  the  new  maketh  a  rent,  and 
the  piece  that  was  taken  out  of  the  new  agreeth 
not  with  the  old.     And  no  man  putteth  new  wine 
into  old  bottles  ;  else  the  new  wine  will  burst  the 
bottles,  and  be  spilled,  and  the  bottles  shall  pe- 
rish.  But  new  wine  must  be  put  into  new  bottles ; 
and  both  are  preserved.     No   man    also  having 
drunk  old  wine  straightway  desireth  new  :  for  he 
saith,  The  old  is  better. 

t  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  second  Sabbath 
after  the  first,  that  he  went  through  the  corn  fields  ; 
and  his  disciples  plucked  the  ears  of  corn,  and 
did  eat,  rubbing  them  in  their  hands.  And  certain 


If 


*  Luke,  chap.  vi.  [v.]  SO. 


11 


t  Luke,  chap.  vi.  i 


I  i 


-_> 


b\i 


of  the  Pharisees  said  unto  them,  Why  do  ye  that 
which  is  not  lawful  to  do  on  the  sabbath-days  ? 
And  Jesus  answering  them  said,  Have  ye  not  read 
so  much  as  this,  what  David  did,  when  himself 
was  an  hungered,  and  they  which  were  with  him  ; 
how  he  went  into  the  house  of  God,  and  did  take 
and  eat  the  shew-bread,  and  gave  also  to  them 
that  were  with  him  ;  which  it  is  not  lawful  to  eat 
but  for  the  Priests  alone  ?  And  he  said  unto  them. 
That  the  Son  of  man  is  Lord  also  of  the  sabbath. 

And  it  came  to  pass  also  on  another  sabbath, 
that  he  entered  into  the  synagogue  and  taught : 
and  there  was  a  man  whose  right  hand  was  with- 
ered. And  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  watched 
him,  whether  he  would  heal  on  the  sabbath-day  ; 
that  thev  mis^ht  find  an  accusation  against  him. 
But  he  knew  their  thoughts,  and  said  to  the  man 
which  had  the  withered  hand,  Rise  up  and  stand 
forth  in  the  midst.  And  he  arose  and  stood  forth. 
Then  said  Jesus  unto  them,  I  will  ask  you  one 
thing  ;  Is  it  lawful  on  the  sabbath-day  to  do  good, 
or  to  do  evil  ?  to  save  life,  or  to  destroy  it  ? 

*  And  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  on  his  disciples,  and 
said.  Blessed  be  ye  poor :  for  yours  is  the  kingdom 
of  God.  Blessed  are  ye  that  hunger  now  :  for 
ye  shall  be  filled.  Blessed  areye  that  weep  now: 
for  ye  shall  laugh.  Blessed  are  ye,  when  men  shall 
hate  you,  and  when  they  shall  separate  you /rom 
their  company,  and  shall  reproach  you,  and  cast 
out  your  name  as  evil,  for  the  Son  of  man's  sake. 

■"  Luke,  chap,  vi,  20. 


59 

Rejoice  ye  in  that  day,  and  leap  for  joy  :  for,  be- 
hold, your  reward  is  great  in  heaven  :  for  in  the 
like  manner  did  their  fathers  unto  the  prophets. 
But  wo  unto  you  that  are  rich  !  for  ye  have  re- 
ceived your  consolation.     Wo  unto  you  that  are 
full  !  for  ye    shall  hunger.     Wo  unto  you   that 
laugh  now  !  for  ye  shall  mourn  and  weep.     Wo 
unto  you,  when  all  men  shall  speak  well  of  you  ! 
for  so  did  their  fathers  to  the  false  prophets.     But 
I  say  unto  you  which  hear,  Love  your  enemies, 
do  good  to  them  which  hate  you,  bless  them  that 
curse  you,  and  pray  for  them  which  despitefully 
use  you.     And  unto  him  that  smiteth  thee  on  the 
one  cheek,   offer  also  the   other  ;  and  him  that 
taketh   away  thy  cloak,  forbid    not  to    take   thy 
coal  also.  Give  to  every  man  that  asketh  of  thee  ; 
and    of  him  that  taketh    away    thy  goods,  ask 
them   not  again.     And  as  ye    would  that    men 
should  do  to  you,  do  ye  also  to  them  likewise. 
For  if  ye  love  them  which  love  you,  what  thank 
have   ye  ?  for  sinners  also  love  those  that  love 
them.     And  if  ye  do  good  to  them  which  do  good 
to  you,  what  thank  have  ye  ?  for  sinners  also  do 
even  the  same.     And  if  ye  lend  to  them  of  whom 
ye  hope  to  receive,  what  thank  have  ye  ?  for  sin- 
ners also  lend  to  sinners,  to  receive  as  much  again. 
But  love  ye  your  enemies,  and  do  good,  and  lend, 
hoping  for  nothing  again  ;  and  your  reward  shall 
be  great,  and   ye    shall  be  the   children   of  the 
Highest :  for  he  is  kind  unto  the  unthankful  and  to 
the  evil.     Be  ye  therefore   merciful,  as  vour  Fa- 


i\ 


t 


■w 


i^l 


11 


GO 

ther  also  is  merciful.     Judge  not,  and  ye  shall  not 
be  judged  :  condemn  not,  and  ye  shall  not  be  con- 
demned :  forgive,  and  ye  shall  be  forgiven  :  give, 
and  it  shall   be  given  unto  you ;  good  measure, 
pressed  down,  and  shaken  together,  and  running 
over,  shall  men   give  into  your  bosom.     For  with 
the  same   measure  that  ye  mete  withal,  it  shall 
be  measured  to  you  again.     And  he  spake  a  par- 
able unto   them.   Can   the  blind  lead   the   blind  ? 
shall  they  not  both  fall  into  the  ditch  ?  The  disci- 
ple is  not  above  his  master  :  but  every  one  that  is 
perfect  shall  be  as  his  master.     And  why  behold- 
est  thou  the  mote  that  is  in  thy  brother's  eye,  but 
perceivest  not  the  beam  that  is  in  thine  own  eye  ? 
Either  how  canst  thou  say  to  thy  brother.  Brother, 
let  me  pull  out  the  mote  that  is  in  thine  eye,  when 
thou  thyself  beholdest  not  the  beam  that  is  in  thine 
own  eye  ?  'J  hou  hypocrite  !  cast  out  first  the  beam 
out  of  thine  own  eye,  and  then  shalt  thou  see  clear- 
ly to  pull  out  the  mote  that  is  in  thy  brother's  eye. 
For  a  good  tree  bringeth  not  forth  corrupt  fruit  ; 
neither  doth  a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth  good  fruit. 
For  every  tree  is  known  by  its  own  fruit.     For  of 
thorns   men  do  not  gather  figs,  nor  of  a  bramble 
bush  gather  they  grapes.     A  good  man  out  of  the 
good   treasure   of  his  heart    bringeth  forth    that 
which  is  good  ;  and   an  evil    man  out  of  the  evil 
treasure  of  his  heart  bringeth  forth  that  which  is 
evil :  for  of  the  abundance  of  the  heart  his  mouth 
speaketh.     And    why  call   ye  me.  Lord,  Lord, 
and   do  not  tlie  things  which  I  say  ?  Whosoever 


I 


61 

Cometh  tome,  and  heareth  my  sayings,  and  doeth 
them.  I  will  show  you  to  whom  he  is  like  :  he  is 
like  a  man  which  built  an  house,  and  digged  deep, 
and  laid  the  foundation  on  a  rock  :  and  when  the 
flood  arose,  the  stream  beat  vehemently  upon  that 
house,  and  could  not  shake  it :  for  it  was  founded 
upon  a  rock.  But  he  that  heareth  and  doeth  not, 
IS  like  a  man  that  without  a  foundation  built  an 
house  upon  the  earth  ;  against  which  the  stream 
did  beat  vehemently,  and  immediately  it  fell  ;  and 
the  rum  of  that  house  was  great. 

*  And  one  of  the  Pharisees  desired  him  that  he 
would  eat  with  him.     And  he  went  into  the  Pha- 
risee's house,  and  sat   down  to  meat.     And,  be- 
hold, a  woman   in  the  city,  which  was  a  sinner, 
when  she  knew  that  Jesus  sat  at  meat  in  the  Pha- 
risee's house,   brought  an  alabaster  box  of  oint- 
ment, and  stood  at  his  feet  behind  kirn  weeping, 
and  began  to  wash  his  feetwith  tears,  and  did  wipe 
them  with  the  hairs  of  her  head,  and  kissed  his  feet, 
and  anointed  them  with  the  ointment.  Now  when 
the  Pharisee  which  had  bidden  him  saw  it    he 
spake  within  himself,   saying.  This   man,   if  he 
were  a  prophet,  would  have  known  who  and  what 
manner  of  woman  this  is  that  toucheth  him  ;  for 
she  IS  a  sinner.     And  Jesus  answering  said  unto 
him,   Simon,  I  have  somewhat  to  say  unto  thee. 
And  he  saith.  Master,  say  on.     There  was  a  cer- 
tain  creditor  which  had  two  debtors  :  the  one 
owed  five  hundred  pence,  and  the  other  fifty.  And 


I 


* 


\ 


Tjwke,  chap.  vii.  .sn. 


i        I 


62 


when  they  had  nothing  to  pay,  he  frankly  forgave 
them  both.  Tell  me,  therefore,  which  of  them 
will  love  him  most  ?  Simon  answered  and  said,  I 
suppose  that  he  to  whom  he  forgave  most.  And 
he  said  unto  him,  Thou  hast  rightly  judged.  And 
he  turned  to  the  woman,  and  said  unto  Simon, 
Seest  thou  this  woman  ?  I  entered  into  thine 
house,  thou  gavest  me  no  water  for  my  feet  :  but 
she  hath  washed  my  feet  with  tears,  and  wiped 
them  with  the  hairs  of  her  head.  Thou  gavest  me 
no  kiss  :  but  this  woman  since  the  time  I  came  in 
has  not  ceased  to  kiss  my  feet.  Mine  head  with 
oil  thou  didst  not  anoint :  but  this  woman  hath 
anointed  my  feet  with  ointment.  Wherefore  I 
say  unto  thee,  Her  sins,  which  are  many,  are  for- 
given ;  for  she  loved  much  :  but  to  whom  little  is 
forgiven,  the  same  loveth  little.  And  he  said  unto 
her,  thy  sins  are  forgiven.  And  they  that  sat  at 
meat  with  him,  began  to  say  within  themselves. 
Who  is  this  that  forgiveth  sins  also  ?  And  he  said 
to  the  woman,  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee  ;  go  in 
peace. 

*  And  when  much  people  were  gathered  to- 
gether, and  were  come  to  him  out  of  every  city, 
he  spake  by  a  parable  :  A  sower  went  out  to  sow 
his  seed  :  and  as  he  sowed,  some  fell  by  the  way 
side  ;  and  it  was  trodden  down,  and  the  fowls  of 
the  air  devoured  it.  And  some  fell  upon  a  rock  ; 
and  as  soon  as  it  was  sprung  up,  it  withered  away, 
because  it  lacked  moisture.   And  some  fell  among 

*  Luke,  chap.  viii.  i. 


i    i 


6l^ 

thorns  :  and  the  thorns  sprang   up  with  it,  and 
choked  It.     And  others  fell  on  good  ground,  and 
sprang  up,  and  bare  fruit  an  hundredfold.      And 
when  he  [had]  said  these  things,  he  cried,  He  that 
hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.     And  his  disciples 
asked  him,  saying,  What  might  this  parable  be  ? 
And  he   said,  Unto  you  it  is  given  to  know  the 
mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God  :  but  to  others 
in  parables  ;  that  seeing  they  might  not  see,  and 
hearing  they  might  not  understand.    Now  the  par- 
able IS  this :  The  seed  is  the  word  of  God.  Those 
by  the  way  side  are  they  that  hear;  then  cometh 
the  devil,  and  taketh  the  word  out  of  their  hearts 
lest  they  should  believe  and  be  saved.     They  on 
the  rock  are  they,  which  when  they  hear,  receive 
the  word  with  joy  ;  and  these  have  no  root,  which 
for  a  while  believe,  and  in  time  of  temptations  fall 
away.     And    that  which   fell  among   thorns  are 
they,  which,  when  they  have  heard,  go  forth,  and 
are  choked  with  cares  and  riches  and  pleasures  of 
this  life,  and  bring  no  fruit  to  perfection.     But 
thPt  on  the  good  ground  are  they,  which  in  an 
honest  and  good  heart,  having  heard  the  word 
keep  It,  and  bring  forth  fruit  with  patience.     No' 
man,  when  he  hath  lighted  a  candle,  covereth  it   ' 
with  a  vessel,  or  putteth  it  under  a  bed  ;  but  set- 
teth  It  on  a  candlestick,  that  they  which  enter  in 
may  see  the  light.     For  nothing  is  secret,  that 
shall  not  be  made  manifest  ;  neither  any  tUns: 
hid,  that  shall  not  be  known  and  come  abroad 
rake  heed  therefore  how  ye  hear  :  for  whosoever 


.If 
*i  1 


(J4 


hath,  to  him  shall  be  given  ;  and  whosoever  hath 
not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  even  that  which  he 
seemeth  to  have. 

Then  came  to  him  his  mother  and  his  brethren, 
and  could  not  come  at  him  for  the  press.  And  it 
was  told  him  hy  certain  which  said,  Thy  mother 
and  thy  brethren  stand  without,  desiring  to  see 
thee.  And  he  answered  and  said  unto  them,  My 
mother  and  my  brethren  are  these  which  hear  the 
word  of  God  and  do  it. 

*  Then  there  arose  a  reasoning  among  them, 
which  of  them  should  be  greatest.  And  Jesus, 
perceiving  the  thought  of  their  heart,  took  a  child, 
and  set  him  by  him,  and  said  unto  them,  Whoso- 
ever shall  receive  this  child  in  my  name  receiveth 
me :  and  whosoever  shall  receive  me,  receiveth 
him  that  sent  me  :  for  he  that  is  least  among  you 
all,  the  same  shall  be  great.  And  John  answered 
and  said.  Master,  we  saw  one  casting  out  devils  in 
thy  name  ;  and  we  forbad  him,  because  he  follow- 
eth  not  with  us.  And  Jesus  said  unto  him.  Forbid 
him  not :  for  he  that  is  not  against  us,  is  for  us. 

And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  time  was  come 
that  he  should  be  received  up,  he  steadfastly  set  his 
face  to  go  to  Jerusalem,  and  sent  messengers  be- 
fore his  face  :  and  they  went,  and  entered  into  a 
village  of  the  Samaritans,  to  make  ready  for  him. 
And  they  did  not  receive  him,  because  his  face  was 
as  though  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem.  And  when 
his  disciples  James  and  John  saw  this,  they  said. 

Luke,  chap.  ix.  46. 


m 


65 

Lord,  wilt  thou  that  we  command  tire  to  come 
down  from  heaven,  and  consume  them,  even  as 
Eliasdid  ?  But  he  turned,  and  rebuked  them,  and 
said.  Ye  know  not  what  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of. 
For  the  Son  of  man  is  not  come  to  destroy  men's 
lives,  but  to  save  them.  And  they  went  to  another 
village. 

And  it  came  to  pass,  that,  as  they  went  in  the 
way,  a  certain  man  said  unto  him.  Lord,  I  will 
follow  thee  whithersoever  thou  goest.     And  Jesus 
said  unto  him.  Foxes  have  holes,  and  birds  of  the 
air  have  nests  ;  but  the   Son   of  man   hath    not 
where  to  lay  his  head.    And  he  said  unto  another, 
Follow  me.     But  he  said.  Lord,  suffer  me  first  tJ 
go  and  bury  my  father.     Jesus  said  unto  him,  Let 
the  dead  bury  their  dead  :  but  go  thou  and  preach 
the  kingdom  of  God.     And    another  also   said, 
Lord,  I    will    follow   thee;  but  let   me   first   go 
bid  them  farewell,  which  are  at  home  at  my  hous'e. 
And  Jesus  said  unto  him.  No  man  having  put  his 
hand  to  the  plough,  and  looking  back,  is  fit  for  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

*  After  these  things,  the  Lord  appointed  other 
seventy  also,  and  sent  them  two  and  two  before 
his  face  into  every  city  and  place,  whither  he  him- 
self would  come.  Therefore,  said  he  unto  them. 
The  harvest  truly  is  great,  but  the  labourei-;  arc 
few  :  pray  ye  therefore  the  Lord  of  the  harvest, 
that  he  would  send  forth  labourers  into  his  harvest 
(foyour  ways:  behold,  I  send  you  forth  as  Iambs 

l^uko,  chap.  X.  1. 
1^ 


( 


66 

amung   wolves.     Carry  neither  purse,   nor  scrip, 
nor  slioes  :  and  salute  no  man  by  the  way.     And 
into  whatsoever  house  ye  enter,  first  say,  Peace  be 
to  this  house.     And  if  the  son  of  peace  be  there, 
your  peace  shall  rest  upon  it  :  if  not,  it  shall  turn 
to  you   again.     And  in  the    same  house   remain, 
eating  and   drinking  such    things  as    they  give  : 
for  the   labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire.     Go  not 
from  house  to  house.     And  into  whatsoever  city 
ye  enter,  and  they  receive  you,  eat  such  things  as 
are  set  before  you  :  and   heal  the  sick  that  are 
therein,  and  say  unto  them,  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  come  nigh  unto  you.     But  into  whatsoever  city 
ye  enter,  and  they  receive  you  not,  go  your  ways 
out  into  the  streets  of  the  same,  and  say,  Even  the 
very  dust  of  your  city,  which  cleaveth  on  us,  we 
do  wipe  off  against  you  :  notwithstanding,   be  ye 
sure  of  this,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come  nigh 
unto  you.     But   I   say  unto  you,  that  it  shall  be 
more  tolerable    in  that  day   for  Sodom,   than  for 
that  city.      Wo    unto   thee,    Chorazin  !  wo  unto 
thee,  Bethsaida !  for  if  the  mighty  works  had  been 
done  in  Tyre  and  Sidon,  which  have  been  done  in 
you,  they  had  a  great  while  ago  repented,  sitting 
in  sackcloth  and  ashes.   But  it  shall  be  more  tole- 
rable for  Tyre  and  Sidon  at  the  judgment,  than 
for  you.      And  thou,  Capernaum,  which  art  exalt- 
ed to  heaven,  shalt  be  thrust  down  to  hell.     He 
that  heareth  you,  heareth    me  ;  and  he  that  de- 
spiseth  you,  despiseth  me  ;  and  he  that  despiseth 
me,  dejipisath  him  that  sent  me. 


67 

And,  behold,  a  certain  Lawyer  stood  up,  and 
tempted  him,  saying,  Master,  what  shall  I  do  to 
inherit  eternal  life  ?  He   said  unto  him.  What  is 
written  in  the   law  ?  how  readest  thou  ?  And  he 
answering  said,  Thou  shalt  love    the   Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and 
with  all  thy  strength,  and  with  all  thy  mind  ;  and 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself.     And  he  said  unto  him, 
Thou  hast  answered  right  :  this  do,  and  thou  shalt 
live.     But  he,  willing  to  justify  himself,  said  unto 
Jesus,  And  who  is  my  neighbour  ?  And  Jesus  an- 
swering said,  A  certain  man  went  down  from  Je- 
rusalem to  Jericho,  and  fell  among  thieves,  which 
stripped  him  of  his  raiment,  and  wounded  /mn, 
and    departed,  leaving  him  half  dead.     And  by 
chance   there   came   down  a   certain  Priest  that 
way  :  and  when  he  saw  him,  he  passed  by  on  the 
other  side.     And  likewise  a  Levite,  when  he  was 
at  the  place,  came  and  looked  on  him,  and  passed 
by  on  the  other  side.     But  a  certain  J^amaritan, 
as  he  journeyed,  came  where  he  was  :  and  when  he 
saw  him,  he  had  compassion  on  him,  and  went  to 
Am,  and  bound  up  his  wounds,  pouring  in  oil  and 
wine,  and  set  him  on  his  own  beast,  and  brought 
him  to  an  inn,  and  took  care  of  him.     And  on  the 
morrow  when  he  departed,  he  took  out  two  ponce, 
and  gave  ihem  to  the   host,  and  said  unto  him, 
Take  care  of  him  ;  and  whatsoever  thou  spendest 
more,    when  I  come  again,   I   will    repay    thee. 
Which  now  of  these   three,  thinkest  thou,   was 

*  Luke, chap.  x.  i?l>. 


'^- 


A 


r^ 


II* 


il> 


neighbour  unto  him  that  fell  among  the  thieves  r 
And  he  said,  lie  that  showed  mercy  on  him. 
Then  said  Jesus  unto  him,  Go,  and  do  thou  like- 
wise. 

*  Now  it  came  to  pass,  as  they  went,  that  he 
entered  into  a  certain  village  :  i  i  a  certain  wo- 
man named  Martha,  received  him  into  her  house. 
And  :<he  had  a  sisier  called  Mary,  which  also  sat 
at  Jesus'  feet,  and  heard  his  word.  But  Martha 
was  cumbered  about  much  serving,  and  came  to 
him,  and  said,  Lord,  dost  thou  not  care  that  my 
sister  hath  left  me  to  serve  alone  ?  Bid  her  there- 
fore that  she  help  me.  And  Jesus  answered  and 
said  unto  her,  Martha,  Martha,  thou  art  careful 
and  troubled  about  many  things  :  but  one  thing  is 
needful  :  and  Mary  hath  chosen  that  good  part, 
which  shall  not  be  taken  away  from  her. 

t  And  it  came  to  pass,  that,  as  he  was  i)raying 
in  a  certain  place,  when  he  ceased,  one  of  his  dis- 
ciples saitl  unto  him,  Lord,  teach  us  to  pray,  as 
John  also  tnught  his  disciples.  And  he  said  unto 
them,  When  ye  pray,  say,  Our  father  which  art  in 
heaven,  hallowed  be  thy  name.  Thy  kingdom 
come.  Thy  wdl  be  done,  as  in  heaven,  so  in 
carih.  Give  us  day  by  day  our  daily  bread.  And 
forgive  us  our  sins  ;  for  we  also  forgive  every  one 
that  is  iuilebted  lo  us.  And  lead  uj<  not  into  temp- 
tatitm  ;  but  deliver  us  from  evil.  And  he  said 
unto  them.  Which  of  you  shall  have  a  friend,  and 
shall  go  unto  him  at  midnight,  and  say  unto  him, 

•-*  Tiiike,  rhnp.  x.  O.'l.  i  Luke.  rh;ip.x«.  1. 


m 

Friend,  lend  me  three  loaves  :  for  a  friend  of  mme 
in  his  journey  is  come  to  me,  and  I  have  nothing 
to  set  before  him  ?  And  he  from  within  shall  an- 
swer and  say.  Trouble  me  not  :  the  door  is  now 
shut,  and  my  children  are  with  me  in  bed  ;  I  can- 
not rise  and  give  thee.     1  say  unto  you.  Though 
he  will  not  rise  and  give  him,  because  he  is  his 
friend,  yet  because  of  his  importunity  he  will  rise 
and  give  him  as  manv  as  he  needeth.     And  I  sav 
unto  you,  Ask,  and  it  shall  be  given  you  ;  seek, 
and  ye  shall  find  ;  knock,  and  it  shall  be  opened 
unto  you.     For  every  one  that  asketh  receiveth  ; 
and   he  that    seeketh  findeth  ;  and  to  him    that 
knocketh,  it  shall  be  opened.     If  a  son  shall  ask 
bread  of  any  of  you  that  is  a  father,  will  he  give 
liim  a  stone  ?  Or  if  he  ask  a  fish  will  he  for  a  fish 
give  him  a  serpent  ?  Or  if  he  shall  ask  an  egg,  will 
he  oflTer  him  a  scorpion  ?  If  ye,  then,  bemg  evil, 
know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children 
liovv  much   more  shall  7/our  heavenly  Father  give 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him  ! 

*  And  it  came  to  i)ass,  as  he  spake  these  things, 
a  certain  woman  of  the  company  lifted  up  her 
voice,  and  said  unto  him,  Blessed  is  the  womb 
that  bare  thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou  hast 
sucked.  But  he  said.  Yea,  rather  blessed  are  they 
that  hear  the  word    of  God  and  kee  p  it. 

t  No  man,  when  he  hath  lighted  a  candle,  put- 
teth  it  in  a  secret  place,  neither  under  a  bushel, 
but  on  a  candlestick,  that  they  which  come  in  may 


■^  Luke,  chap.  xi.  27. 


^  Luke.  chap.  xi.  SS. 


\ 


Il 


see  the  light.  The  light  of  the  body  is  the  eye  : 
therefore  when  thine  eye  is  single,  thy  whole  body 
also  is  full  of  light ;  but  when  thine  eye  is  evil, 
thy  body  also  is  full  of  darkness.  Take  heed 
therefore  that  the  light  that  is  in  thee  be  not  dark- 
ness. If  thy  whole  body  therefore  be  full  of  light, 
having  no  part  dark,  the  whole  shall  be  full  of 
light,    as  when   the    bright  shining  of  a  candle 

doth  give  the  light. 

And  as  he  speak,  a  certain  Pharisee  besought 
him  to  dine  with  him  :  and  he  went  in,  and  sat 
down  to  meat.  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it, 
he  marvelled  that  he  had  not  first  washed  before 
dinner.  And  the  Lord  said  unto  him.  Now  do  ye 
Pharisees  make  clean  the  outside  of  the  cup  and 
the  platter ;  but  your  inward  part  is  full  of  raven- 
ing and  wickedness.  Ye  fools,  did  not  he  that 
made  that  which  is  without,  make  that  which  is 
within  also  ?  But  rather  give  alms  of  such  things 
as  you  have  ;  and,  behold,  all  things  are  clean  un- 
to you.  But  wo  unto  you,  Pharisees !  for  ye  tithe 
mint  and  rue  and  all  manner  of  herbs,  and  pass 
over  judgment  and  the  love  of  God  :  these  ought 
ve  to  have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the  other  un- 
done. Wo  unto  you,  Pharisees  !  for  ye  love  the 
uppermost  seats  in  the  synagogues,  and  greet- 
ings in  the  markets.  Wo  unto  you.  Scribes  and 
Pharisees,  hypocrites  !  for  ye  are  as  graves  which 
appear  not,  and  the  men  that  walk  over  them  are 
not  aware  of  them.  Then  answered  one  of  the 
liawvers,  and  said  unto  him.  Master,  thus  say- 


71 


ing,  thou  reproachest  us  also.  And  he  said,  Wo 
unto  you  also,  ye  Lawyers !  for  ye  lade  men  with 
burdens  grievous  to  be  borne,  and  ye  yourselves 
touch  not  the  burdens  with  one  of  3  our  fingers. 
Wo  unto  you!  for  ye  build  the  sepulchres  of  the 
prophets,  and  your  fathers  killed  them.  Truly 
ye  bear  witness  that  ye  allow  the  deeds  of  your 
fathers:  for  they  indeed  killed  them,  and  ye  build 
their  sepulchres.  Therefore  also  said  the  w  isdom 
of  God,  I  will  send  them  prophets  and  apostles, 
and  some  of  them  they  shall  slay  and  persecute : 
that  the  blood  of  all  the  prophets,  which  was 
shed  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  mav  be  re- 
quired  of  this  generation  ;  from  the  blood  of  Abel 
unto  the  blood  of  Zacharias,  which  perished  be- 
tween the  altar  and  the  temple  :  Verily  I  say  unto 
you.  It  shall  be  required  of  this  generation.  Wo 
unto  you.  Lawyers !  for  ye  have  taken  away  the 
key  of  knowledge  :  ye  entered  not  in  yourselves, 
and  them  that  were  entering  in  ye  hindered. 

*  In  the  mean  time,  when  there  were  gathered 
together  an  innumerable  multitude  of  people,  in- 
somuch that  they  trode  one  upon  another,  he  be- 
gan to  say  unto  his  disciples  first  of  all,  Beware  ye 
of  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees,  which  is  hypocrisy. 
For  there  is  nothing  covered,  that  shall  not  be  re- 
vealed ;  neither  hid,  that  shall  not  be  known. 
Therefore,  whatsoever  ye  have  spoken  in  dark- 
ness shall  be  heard  in  the  light  ;  and  that  which 
ye  have  spoken  in  the  ear  in  closets,  shall  be  pro- 

*  Luke.  r)iu}).  xi*.  1 


i 


M 


^9- 


* 

claimed  upon  the  house-tops.  And  I  say  unto 
you,  my  friends,  Be  not  afraid  of  them  that  kill 
the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more  that  they 
can  do.  But  I  will  forvvarn  you  whom  ye  shall 
fear  :  Fear  him,  which  after  he  hath  killed,  hath 
power  to  cast  into  hell ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear 
him.  Are  not  five  sparrows  sold  for  two  far- 
things ?  and  not  one  of  them  is  forgotten  before 
God  :  but  even  the  very  hairs  of  your  head  arc 
all  numbered.  Fear  not,  therefore  :  ye  are  of 
more  value  than  many  sparrows.  Also  I  say  unto 
you.  Whosoever  shall  confess  me  before  men, 
him  shall  the  Son  of  man  also  confess  before  the 
anirels  of  God  :  but  he  that  denieth  me  before 
men,  shall  be  denied  before  the  angels  of  God. 
And  whosoever  shall  speak  a  word  against  the 
Son  of  mui,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him:  but  unto 
him  that  bl?isphemeth  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven.  And  when  they  bring  you 
unto  the  synagogues,  and  inito  magistrates,  and 
powers  :  take  ye  no  thought  how  or  what  thing 
ye  shall  answer,  or  what  ye  shall  say  ;  for  the 
Holy  Ghost  shall  teath  you  in  the  same  hour  what 
ye  ought  to  say.  And  one  of  the  company  said 
unto  him,  Master,  speak  to  my  bi  other,  that  he  di- 
vide the  inheritrmce  with  me.  And  he  said  unto 
him,  Man,  who  made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over 
vou  ?  And  he  said  unto  them,  Take  heed,  and 
beware  of  covetousness  ;  for  a  man's  lifeconsist- 
eth  not  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  which  he 
possesseth.   And  he  spake  a  parable  unto  them. 


73 

saying,  The  ground  of  a  certain  rich  man  brought 
forth  plentifully  :  and  he  thought  within  himself, 
saying,  What  shall  I  do,  because  I  have  no  room 
where  to  bestow  my  fruits  ?  And  he  said,   This 
will  I  do  :  I  will  pull  down  my  barns,  and  build 
greater  ;  and  there  will   I  bestow  all  my  fruits 
and  my  goods.     And  I  will  say  to  my  soul,  Soul, 
thou  hast  much  goods  laid  up  for  many  years  ; 
take  thine  ease,  drink  and  be  merry.     But  God 
said  unto   him.    Thou  fool  !  this   night  thy  soul 
shall  be  required  of  thee  :  then  whose  shall  those 
things  be,   which  thou  hast  provided  ?  So  is  he 
that   layeth    up  treasure  for  himself,  and   is  not 
rich  towards  God.     And  he  said  unto  his  disci- 
ples. Therefore  I  say  unto  you,  Take  no  thought 
for  your  life,  what  ye  shall  eat ;  neither  for  the 
body,   what  ye  shall   put  on.     The  life  is  more 
than  meat,  and  the  body  is  more  than  raiment. 
Consider   the    ravens  :  for  they  neither  sow  nor 
reap  ;  which  neither  have   storehouse  nor  barn  ; 
and  God  feedeth  them :  how  much   more  are  ye 
better  than  the  fowls  !   And  whicdi  of  you  with 
taking  thought  can  add  to  his  stature  one  cubit  r 
If  ye  then  be  not  able  to  do  that  thing  which  is 
least,  why  take  ye  thought  for  the  rest  ?  Consider 
the  lilies  how  they  grow  :  they  toil  not,  they  spin 
not :  and  yet  I  say  unto  you,  that  Solomon  in  all 
his  glory  was  not  arrayed   like  one  of  these.     If 
then  God  so  clothe  the  grass,  which  is  to-day  in 
the  field,  and  to-morrow   is  cast  into  the  oven  ; 
how  much  more  will  he  clothe  you,  O  ye  of  little 

13 


^w 


74 

taitli  !  And  seek  not  ye  whatyc  shall  eat,  or  what 
ye  shall  drink,  neither  be  ye  of  doubtful  mind. 
For     all    these    things     do   the  nations   of    the 
world  seek  after  :  and  your  Father  knoweth  that 
[ye]  have  need  of  these  things.     But  rather  seek 
ve  the  kingdom  of  God  ;    and   all  these   things 
shall    be  added  unto  you.     Fear  not,  little  flock  ; 
for  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you 
the  kingdom.     Sell  that  ye  have,  and  give  alms  ; 
provide   yourselves  bags   which  wax   not  old,  a 
treasure  in   the  heavens  that  faileth  not,  where  no 
thief  approacheth,   neither  moth  corrupteth.   For 
where  your  treasure  is,  there  will  your  heart  be 
also.    Let   your  loins  be  girded  about,  and  your 
lights  burning  ;  and  ye  yourselves  like  unto  men 
that  wait  for  their  lord,  when  he  will  return  from 
the  wedding  ;  that  when  he  cometh  and  knocketh, 
they  may  open  unto  him  immediately.     Blessed 
are  those   servants,  whom  the  lord,  when  he  co- 
meth, shall  find  watching  :  verily  I  say  unto  you, 
that  he  shall  gird  himself,  and  make  them  to  sit 
down  to   meat,    and  will  come    forth  and  serve 
them.     And  if  he  shall  come  in  the  second  watch, 
or  come  in  the  third  watch,  and  find  thf^m  so, bless- 
ed are  those   servants.     And  this  know,  that  if 
the  good  man  of  the  house  had  known  what  hour 
the  thief  would   come,  he  would   have  watched, 
and  not  have    suffered  his    house  to  be  broken 
through.    Be  ye  therefore  ready  also  :  for  the  Son 
of  man  cometh  at  an  hour,  when  ye  think  not. 
Then  Peter  said  unto  him.  Lord,  speakest  thon 


ro 


this  parable  unto  us,  or  even  to  all  ?  And  the 
Lord  said.  Who  then  is  that  faithful  and  wise 
steward,  whom  his  lord  shall  make  ruler  over  his 
household,  to  give  them  their  portion  of  meat  in 
due  season  ?  Blessed  is  that  servant,  whom  his 
lord,  when  he  cometh,  shall  find  so  doing.  Of  a 
truth  I  say  unto  you,  that  he  will  make  him  ruler 
over  all  that  he  hath.  But  and  if  that  servant  say 
in  his  heart,  My  lord  delayeth  his  coming ;  and 
shall  begin  to  beat  the  men-servants  and  maidens, 
and  to  eat  and  drink,  and  to  be  drunken ;  the 
lord  of  that  servant  will  come  in  a  day  when  he 
looketh  not  for  him,  and  at  an  hour  when  he  is 
not  aware,  and  will  cut  him  in  sunder,  and  will 
appoint  him  his  portion  with  the  unbelievers.  And 
that  servant,  which  knew  his  lord's  will,  and  pre- 
pared not  himself,  neither  did  according  to  his 
will,  shall  be  beaten  with  many  stripes.  But  he 
that  knew  not,  and  did  commit  things  worthy  of 
stripes,  shall  be  beaten  with  few  stripes.  F'or 
unto  whomsoever  much  is  given,  of  him  ^hall  be 
much  required  :  and  to  whom  men  have  conunit- 
ted  much,  of  him  they  will  ask  the  more  I  am 
come  to  send  fire  on  the  earth  :  and  what  will  I, 
if  it  be  already  kindled  ?  but  I  have  a  baptism  to 
be  baptized  with  ;  and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it 
be  accomplished  I  Suppose  ye  that  I  am  come  to 
give  peace  on  earth  ?  1  tell  you.  Nay  ;  but  i  ather 
division  ;  for  from  henceforth  there  shall  be  five 
in  one  house  divided,  three  against  two,  and  two 
against  three.  The  father  shall  be  divided  aixainst 


|l 


\ 


)  "■' 


■i 


I 


/ 


mi 


7(i 

the  son,  and  the  son  against  the  father ;  the  mo- 
ther againjiit  the  daughter,  and  the  daughter  against 
the  mother  ;  the  mother-in-law  against  her  daugh- 
ter-in-law, and  the  daughter-in-law  against  her 
mnther-in-law.  And  he  said  also  to  the  people, 
When  ye  see  a  cloud  rise  out  of  the  west,  straight- 
way ye  say,  Th(;re  cometh  a  shower;  and  so  it  is. 
And  when  ye  see  the  south  wind  blow,  ye  say, 
There  will  be  heat ;  and  it  cometh  to  pass.  Ye 
hypocrites,  ye  can  discern  the  face  of  the  sky  and 
of  the  earth  ;  but  how  is  it  that  ye  do  not  discern 
this  time  ?  Yea,  and  why  even  of  yourselves  judge 
ye  not  what  is  right  ?  When  thou  goest  with 
thine  adversary  to  the  magistrate,  as  thou  art  in 
the  way,  give  diligence  that  thou  mayest  be  de- 
livered from  him  ;  lest  he  hale  thee  to  the  judge, 
and  the  judge  deliver  thee  to  the  officer,  and  the 
officer  cast  thee  into  prison.  I  tell  thee,  thou 
shalt  not  depart  thence,  till  thou  hast  paid   the 

very  last  mite. 

*  There  were  present  at  that  season  some  that 
told  him  of  the  Galileans,  whose  blood  Pilate  had 
mingled  with  their  sacrifices.  And  Jesus  an^ 
swering  said  unto  them.  Suppose  ye  that  these 
Galileans  were  sinners  above  all  the  Galileans, 
because  they  suffered  such  things?  I  tell  you, 
Nay  ;  but,  except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise 
perish.  Or  those  eighteen,  upon  whom  the  tower 
in  Siloam  fell,  and  slew  them,  think  ye  that  they 


*  Luke,  chap.xiii.  1. 


it 


were  sinners  above  all  men  that  dwelt  in  Jerusa- 
lem ?  I  tell  you,  Nay :  but,  except  ye  repent,  ye 
shall  all  likewise  perish.  He  spake  also  this  pa- 
rable :  A  certain  man  had  a  fig-tree  planted  in 
his  vineyard  :  and  he  came  and  sought  fruit 
thereon,  and  found  none.  Then  said  he  unto  the 
dresser  of  his  vineyard.  Behold,  these  three  years 
I  come  seeking  fruit  on  this  fig-tree,  and  find 
none  :  cut  it  down  ;  why  cumbereth  it  the  ground  ? 
And  he  answering  said  unto  him,  Lord,  let  it 
alone  this  year  also,  till  I  shall  dig  about  it,  and 
dung  it:  and  if  it  bear  fruit,  well:  and  if  not. 
thcN  after  that  thou  shalt  cut  it  <lovvn. 

*  And  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue  answered 
with  indignation,  because  that  Jesus  had  healed 
on  the  sabbath-day,  and  said  unto  the  people. 
There  are  six  days  in  which  men  ought  to  work  : 
in  them  therefore  come  and  be  healed,  and  not 
on  the  sabbath-day.  The  Lord  then  answered 
him,  and  said,  Thou  hypocrite !  doth  not  each 
one  of  you  on  the  sabbath  loose  his  ox  or  his  ass 
from  the  stall,  and  lead  him  away  to  watering? 
And  ought  not  this  woman,  being  a  daughter  of 
Abraham,  whom  Satan  hath  bound,  lo,  these 
eighteen  years,  to  be  loosed  from  this  bond  on 
the  sabbath-day  ?  And  when  he  had  said  these 
things,  all  his  adversaries  were  ashamed  :  and  all 
the  people  rejoiced  for  all  the  glorious  things  that 
were  done  by  him. 


t 


ill 


iffl 


Luke,  chap.  xiii.  [14.]  17. 


n 


?. 


7t; 

'J1ien  said  he,  Unto  what  is  the  kingdom  of 
God  like  ?  and  whereunto  shall  I  resemble  it  ?  It 
is  like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,  which  a  man 
took,  and  cast  into  his  garden  ;  and  it  grew,  and 
waxed  a  great  tree  ;  and  the  fowls  of  the  air 
lodged  in  the  branches  of  it.  And  again  he  said, 
Whereunto  shall  I  liken  the  kingdom  of  God  ?  It 
is  like  leaven,  which  a  woman  took  and  hid  in 
three  measures  of  meal,  till  the  whole  was  lea- 
vened. 

Then  said  one  unto  him.  Lord,  are  tliere  few 
that  be  saved  ?  And  he  said  unto  them.  Strive 
to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate :  for  many,  I  say  unto 
you,  will  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able. 
When  once  the  master  of  the  house  is  risen  up,  and 
hrth  shut  to  the  door,  and  ye  begin  to  stand  without, 
and  to  knock  at  the  door,  saying.  Lord,  Lord,  open 
unto  us  ;  and  he  shall  answer  and  say  unto  you,  I 
know  you  not  whence  ye  are  :  then  shall  ye  begin 
to  say.  We  have  eaten  and  drunken  in  thy  pre- 
sence, and  thou  hast  taught  in  our  streets.  But 
he  shall  say,  I  tell  you,  I  know  you  not  whence 
ye  are ;  depart  from  me,  all  ye  workers  of  iniqui- 
ty. There  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth,  when  ye  shall  see  Abrah;»m,  and  Isaac,  and 
Jacob,  and  all  the  prophets,  in  the  kingdom  of 
God,  and  you  yourselres  thrust  out.  And  they 
shall  come  f'om  the  east,  am]  from  the  west,  and 
from  the  north,  and  fr<rm  the  south,  and  shall  sit 
down  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  And,  behold,  there 
are  last  which  shall  be  first,  and  there  are  first 
which  shall  be  last. 


79 

The  same  day  there  came  certain  of  the  Pha- 
risees, saying  unto  him.  Get  thee  out,  and  depart 
hence  :  for  Herod  will  kill  thee.  And  he  said 
unto  them.  Go  ye,  and  tell  that  fox,  Behold,  I 
cast  out  devils,  and  I  do  cures  to-day  and  to-mor- 
row, and  the  third  day  I  shall  be  perfected.  Ne- 
vertheless I  must  walk  to-day,  and  to-morrow,  and 
the  day  following :  for  it  cannot  be  that  a  prophet 
perish  out  of  Jerusalem.  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusa- 
lem, which  killest  the  prophets,  and  stonest  them 
that  are  sent  unto  thee ;  how  often  would  I  have 
gathered  thy  children  together,  as  a  hen  doth  ga- 
ther her  brood  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would 
not !  Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate  : 
and  verily  I  say  unto  you.  Ye  shall  not  see  me, 
until  the  time  come  when  ye  shall  say.  Blessed  is 
he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

And  it  came  to  pass,  as  he  went  into  the 
house  of  one  of  the  chief  Pharisees  to  eat  bread 
on  the  sabbath-day,  that  they  watched  him.  And, 
behold,  there  was  a  certain  man  before  him  which 
had  the  dropsy.  And  Jesus  answering  spake  unto 
the  Lawyers  and  Pharisees,  saying.  Is  it  lawful  to 
heal  on  the  sabbath-day  ?  And  they  held  their 
peace.  And  he  took  Am,  and  he  healed  him,  and 
let  him  go  ;  and  answered  them,  saying.  Which 
of  you  shall  have  an  ass  or  an  ox  fallen  into  a  pit, 
and  will  not  straightway  pull  him  out  on  the  sab- 
bath-day r  And  they  could  not  answer  him  again 
to  these  things.     And  he  put  forth  a  parable  to 

*  T.nlco.  chap.  \iv.  1. 


^ 


■     I 

i  (I 


,'(f^ 


\v 


i''    , 


i 


i  ./ 


i^- 


<J(*" 


t 


m 


those  which  were  bidden,  when  he  marked  how 
they  chose  out  the  chief  rooms  ;  saying  unto  them, 
When  thou  art  bidden  of  any  man  to  a  wedding, 
sit  not  down  in  the  highest  room ;  lest  a  more 
honourable  man  than  thou  be  bidden  of  him  ;  and 
he  that  bade  thee  and  him  come  and  say  to  thee, 
Give  this  man  place  ;  and  thou  begin  with  shame 
to  take  the  lowest  room.  But  when  thou  art  bid- 
den, go  and  sit  down  in  the  lowest  room  ;  that 
when  he  that  bade  thee  cometh,  he  may  say  unto 
thee,  Friend,  go  up  higher  :  then  shalt  thou  have 
worship  in  the  presence  of  them  that  sit  at  meat 
with  thee.  For  whosoever  exalteth  himself  shall 
be  abased  ;  and  he  that  humbleth  himself  shall  be 
exalted.  Then  said  he  also  to  him  that  bade 
him,  When  thou  makest  a  dinner  or  a  sup- 
per, call  not  thy  friends,  nor  thy  brethren,  neither 
thy  kinsmen,  nor  t/iij  rich  neighbours ;  lest  they 
also  bid  thee  again,  and  a  recompense  be  made 
"thee.  But  when  thou  makest  a  feast,  call  ihe 
poor,  the  maimed,  the  lam(%  the  blii»d  :  and  thou 
shalt  be  blessed ;  for  they  cannot  recompense 
thee  :  for  thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resur- 
rection of  the  just.  And  when  one  of  them  that 
sat  at  meat  with  him  heard  these  thinifs,  he  said 
unto  him,  Blessed  is  he  that  shall  eat  bread  in  the 
kingdom  of  God.  Then  said  he  unto  him,  A  cer- 
tain man  made  a  great  supper,  and  bade  many  : 
and  sent  his  servant  at  supp(*r  time  to  say  to  them 
that  were  bidden,  Come;  for  all  things  are  now 
ready.  And  they  all  with  one  consent  began  to 
make  excuse.     The  first  said  unto  him,  I  have 


] 


u  1 


bought  a  piece  of  ground,  and  I  must  needs  go 
and  see  it :  I  pray  thee  have  me  excused.     And 
another  said,  I  have  bought  five  yoke  of  oxen,  and 
I  go  to  prove  them  :  I  pray  thee  have  me  excused. 
And  another  said,  I  have  married  a  wife,  and  there- 
fore I  cannot  come.     80  that  servant  came,  and 
shewed  his  lord  these  thinufs.     Then  the  mnster 
of  the  house  being  angry,  said  to  his  servant.  Go 
out  quickly  into  the  streets  and  hjnes  of  the  city, 
and  bring  in  hither  tli*-  [>oor,  and  the  maimed,  and 
the   halt,  and   the   blind.      And    the   servant  said. 
Lord,  it  is  done  as   jIiou   hast  commanded,  and 
yet  there  is  room.     And   the  Lord  said  unto  the 
servant,  Go  out  into  che  hioliways  and  hedges,  and 
com|)el  t/iem  to  come  in,  that  my  house  may  be 
filled.     For  I  say  unto  you.  That   none  of  those 
men  which  were  bidden  shall  taste  of  my  supper. 
And    there  wi3nt    great   multitudes  with   him: 
and  he  turned,  and  said   unto  them,  If  anv  man 
come  to  me,  and  hate  not  his  father,  and  mother, 
and  wif(»,  and  ohihiren,  and  brethren,  and  sisters, 
yea,  and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be  my  disci- 
ple.    And  whosoever  doth  not  bear  his  cross,  and 
come  after  me,  cannot  be  my  disriple.    For  which 
of  you,   intending  to  build   a   tower,  sitteth    not 
down  first,  and  counteth  the  cost,  whether  he  have 
siifficient  to  finish  it?  Lest  ha|)ly,  after  he  hath 
laid  the  foundation,  and  is  not  able  to  finish  it,  all 
that  behold  it  begin  to  mock  him,  saying,  This 
man  began  to  build,  and  was  not  able  to  finish. 
Or  what  king,  going  to  make  war  against  another 

14 


(' 


,^l' 


<«■ 


Si 


'/ 


f  f^  ■*'!' 


82 

kincr,  sitteth  not  down  first,  and  consultetli  whether 
he  be  able  with  ten  thousand  to  meet  him  that 
Cometh  a^rainst  him  with  twenty  thousand?  Or 
else,  whih^  the  other  is  yet  a  great  way  ofl^  he  send-^ 
eth  an  ambassage,  and  desireth  conditions  ot 
peace,  ^o  likewise,  whosoever  he  be  of  you  that 
forsaketh  not  all  that  \\v  lialh,  he  cannot  be  my 
disciple.  Salt  is  good  :  but  if  the  salt  have  lost 
its  savour,  wherewith  >hall  it  be  seasoned  ?  It  is 
neither  fit  for  the  land,  nor  yet  for  the  dunghill ; 
but  men  cast  it  out.     He  that  hath  ears  to  hear,  let 

him  hear. 

*  Then  drew  near  unto  him  all  the  publicans 
and  sinners  for  to  luar  him.     And  the   Pharisees 
and  Scribes  murmured,  saying,  This  man  receiveth 
sinners,  and  eateth  with  then).     And  he  spake  this 
parable  unto  them,  sayinix.  What  man  of  you,  hav- 
ino-  an  hundred  sIkmm),  if  he  lose  one  of  them,  doth 
not  leave  the   ninety  and   nine  in  the  wdderness, 
and  go  after  that  whi<  h  is   lost,  imtil    he  find   it? 
And  when    he   hath    found  it.  he  layeth  it  on  his 
shoulders,  rejoieing.     And  when  he  cometh  home, 
he   calleth  together  his  friends   and   neighbours, 
saying  unto  them,   Hejoice  with  me;  for  1  have 
found  my  .sheep  which  was  lost.     I  say  unto  you, 
that  likewise  j(»y  shall  be  in  heaven  over  one  sin- 
ner that  repenieth,  more  than  over  ninety  and  nine 
just  persons  which  need   no  repentance.     Either 
what  woman  having   ten  pieces  of  silver,  if  she 
lose  one  piece,  doth  not  light  a  candle,  and  sweep 

*  Luke,  chap.  xv.  1. 


83 


the  house,  and  seek  diligently  till  she  find  it  f  And 
when  she  hath  found  if,  she  calletli  Iter  friends  and 
Iier    neighbours    together,   saying,    Rejoice    with 
me ;  for  I  have  found  the  piece  which  1  had  lost. 
Jjikewise,  I  say  unto  you,  there  is  joy  in  the   pre- 
senee  of  the  angels  of  God  over   one  sinner  that 
repenteth.     And  he  saiil,  A  cert;un  man  had  two 
sons:  and  the  younger  of  them  said  to  h/s  father, 
Father,  give  me  the  [)ortion  of  goods  that  falleth 
to   me.     And    he  divided   unto    them  his  living. 
And  not  many  days  after  the  younger  son  gather- 
ed all  together,  and   took    his  journey  into   a  far 
counlrv,   and   there   wasted    his    substance    with 
riotous  living.     And  when  he  had  spent  all,  there 
arose  a  mighty  fiunine  iu  that  land  ;  and  he  began 
to  be  in  want.     And  he   went  and  joined  himself 
tea  citizen  of  that  country  ;  and  he  sent  him  into 
his  fields  to  feed  swine.      \nd  he  would  fain  have 
filled  his  belly  with  the  husks   that  the  swine  did 
eat:  and  no  man  gave  unto  him.     And  when  he 
came   to   himself,  he  said,    How  many  hired  ser- 
vants of  my   father's  have  bread   eno»isjh  and  to 
ppare,  and  I  perish  with  hunger  !     I  will  arise  and 
go  to  my  father,  and  will  say  unto  him,  Father,  I 
have  sinned  against  heaven,  and  b(;fore  thee,  and 
am   no  more  worthy  to  be  called  thy  son  :  make 
me  as  one  of  thy  hired  servants.     And  he  arose, 
and  came  to  his  father.      \\w\  when  he  was  yet  a: 
great  way  oflT,  his  father  saw  him,  and  had  com- 
passion, and  ran,  and  fell  on  his  neck,  and  kissed 
him.     And  the  son  said  unto  him,  Father,  I  have 


h'l 


u 


\\ 


Ml 


'.  I 


\.  :i\ 


84 

sinned  against  heaven,  and  in  lliy  sight,  and  ain 
no  more  worthy  to  be  called  thy  son.  But  the 
father  said  to  his  servants.  Bring  forth  the  best 
robe,  and  put  it  on  him  ;  and  put  a  ring  on  liis 
hand,  and  shoes  on  his  teet:  and  bring  hither  the 
fatted  calf,  and  kill  it;  and  let  us  eat,  and  be 
merry :  for  this  my  son  was  dead,  and  is  alive 
again;  he  was  lost,  and  is  found.  And  they  be- 
gan to  be  merry.  Now  his  elder  son  was  in  the 
field  :  and  as  he  came  and  drew  nigh  to  the  house, 
he  heard  music  and  dancing.  And  he  called  one 
of  the  servants,  and  asked  what  these  things 
meant.  And  he  said  unto  him,  Thy  brother  is 
come;  and  thy  father  hath  killed  the  fatted  calf, 
because  he  hath  received  him  safe  and  sound. 
And  he  was  angry,  and  would  not  go  in:  therefore 
came  his  father  out,  and  entreated  him.  And  he 
answering  said  to  his  father,  Lo,  these  many 
years  do  I  serve  thee,  neither  transgressed  I  at 
any  time  thy  commandment :  and  yet  thou  never 
gaveist  me  a  kid,  that  1  might  make  merry  with 
my  friends  :  but  as  soon  as  this  thy  son  was  come, 
which  hath  devoured  thy  living  with  harlots,  thou 
hast  killed  for  him  the  faited  calf  And  he  said 
unto  him,  Son,  thou  art  ever  with  me,  and  all  that 
I  have  is  thine.  It  was  meet  that  we  hhould  make 
merry,  and  be  glad  :  for  this  thy  brother  was 
dead,  and  is  alive  again  ;  and  was   lost,  and   is 

found. 

*  And  he  said  also  unto  his  disciples.  There 

*  Luke,  chap.  xiii.  [xvi.]  1. 


\\\ 


^35 

was  a  certain  rich  man,  which  had  a  steward  ;  and 
the  same  was  accused  unto  him  that  he  had  wasted 
his  goods.     And   he   called   him,   and  said   unto 
him.  How  is  it  that  I  hear  this  of  thee  ?  give  an 
account  of  thy  stevvard^ship  ;  for  thou   mayest  be 
no  longer  steward.     Then  the  steward  said  within 
hims(^lf.  What  shall  I  do,  for  my  lord  taketh  away 
from  me  the  stewardship?  I  cannot  dig  ;  to  beg  I 
am  ashamed.     I  am   resolved   what  to  do,  that, 
when  I  am  put  out  of  the  stewardship,  they  may 
receive  me  into  their  houses.     So  he  called  every 
one  of  his  lord's  debtors  unto  him,  and  said  unto 
the  first.  How   much   owest  thou  unto  my   lord  ? 
And  he  said.  An  hundred  measures  of  oil.     And 
he  said  unto  him.  Take  thy   bill,  and  sit  down 
quickly,  and  write   filly.     Then   said  he   to  ano- 
ther. And  how  much  owest  thou?     And  he  said, 
An  himdred   measures  of  wheat.     And  he  said 
unto  him,  lake  thy  bill,  and  write  fourscore.   And 
the  lord  commended  the  unjust  steward,  because 
he  had  done  wisely  :  for  the  children  of  this  world 
are  in  their  generation  wiser  than  the  children  of 
light.     And    I   say  unto  you.  Make   to  yourselves 
friends  of  the  mammon  of  unrighteousness :  that, 
when  ye  fail,  they  may  receive  you  unto  everlast- 
ing habitations.      He  that  is  faithful  in  tliMt  which 
is  least  is   faithfid  also  in   much  :  and   he  that   is 
unjust  in   the   least   is  unjust   also  in   mut  h.     If 
therefore  ye  have  not  been  faithful  in  the  unright- 
eous mammon,  who  will  commit  to  your  trust  the 
true  riches?     And  if  ye  have  not  been  faithful  in 


( 


V 


in 
ill 


** 


8G 

that  which   is  another  man's,  who  shall  give  yon 
that  which  is  your  own  ?     No  servant  can   serve 
two  masters  :  for  either  he  will  hate  the  one,  and 
love  the  other  ;  or  else  he  will  hold  to  the  one,  and 
despise^  th(^   other.     Ye  cannot   serve    God    and 
mammon.     And    the    Pharisees    also,    who  were 
covetous,   heard   all   these  things  :  and   they  de- 
rided him.      And  he  said   unto  them.  Ye  are  they 
which  justify   yourselves  before   men  ;    but  God 
knoweth  your  hearts  :  for  that  which   is  highly 
esteemed   amongst   men   is   abomination    in    the 
j^^ight  of  God.     The  Law  and  the  Prophets  were 
until  John  :  since  that  time  the   kingdom  of  God 
is  preached,  and  every  man  presseth  into  it.    And 
it  is  easier  for  heaven  and  earth  to  i)ass,  than  one 
tittle  of  the  law  to  fail.      Whosoever  putteth  away 
his  wife,  and  marrieth    another,  commitleth  adul- 
tery :  and  whosoev<M-  marrieth  her  that  is  put  away 
from  her  husband,  committeth  adultery.     There 
was  a  certain  rich  man,  wliirh  was  clothed  in  pur- 
ple and  fine  linen,  and  fared    smiiptuously  every 
day  :  and  there  was  a  certain  beggar  named  La- 
zarus, which  was  laid  at  his  gate,  full  of  sores,  and 
desiring  to  be  fed  with  the  crumbs  which  fell  from 
the   rich   man's  table:  moreover  the  dogs  came 
and  licked  his  sores.     And   it  came  to  pass,  that 
the  beggar  died,  and    was   carried  by  the  angels 
into  Abraham's  bosom  :  the  ri<!h  man  also  died, 
and  was  buried  ;  and  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes, 
being  in   torments,  and   seeth   Abraham  afar  off, 
and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom.     And  he  cried  and  said, 


87 

Father  Abraham,  have  mercy  on  me,  and  send 
Lazarus,  that  he  may  dip  the  tip  of  his  finger  in 
water,  and  cool  my  tongue  ;  for  I  am  tormented 
in  this  flame.  But  Abraham  said,  Son,  remember 
that  thou  in  thy  lifetime  receivedst  thy  good 
things,  and  likewise  Lazarus  evil  thinjrs  :  but  now 
he  is  comforted,  and  thou  art  tormented.  And 
besides  all  this,  between  us  and  you  there  is  a 
great  gulf  fixed  :  so  that  they  which  would  pass 
from  hence  to  you  cannot;  neither  can  they  pass 
to  us,  that  tcoiild  corne  from  thence.  Then  he  said, 
I  pray  thee  therefore,  father,  that  thou  wouldest 
send  him  to  my  father's  house :  for  1  have  five 
brethren  ;  that  he  may  testify  unto  them,  lest  they 
also  come  into  this  place  of  torment.  Abraham 
saith  unto  him,  I'hey  have  Moses  and  the  prophets; 
let  them  hear  them.  And  he  saui.  Nay,  father 
Abraham  :  but  if  one  went  unto  them  from  the 
dead,  they  will  repent.  And  he  said  unto  him, 
If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither 
will  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from  the 
dead. 

^  Then  said  he  unto  the  disciples.  It  is  impos- 
sible but  that  otlences  wil!  come  :  but  wo  unto 
him  through  whom  they  come !  It  were  better 
for  him  that  a  millstone  were  hangcnJ  about  his 
neck,  and  he  cast  into  the  sea,  than  that  he  should 
offend  one  of  these  little  ones.  Take  heed  to 
yourselves  :  If  thy  brother  trespass  against  thee, 
rebuke  him  ;  and  if  he  repent,  forgive  him.     And 

*  Luke,  cliap.  xvii.  1. 


I  I 


i\ 


!'■ 


^ ..  >>■ 


88 


89 


if  he  trespass  against  thee  seven  times  in  a  day, 
and  seven  times  in  a  day  turn  again  to  thee,  say- 
ing, I  repent ;  thou  shalt  forgive  him.  And  the 
Apostles  said  unto  the  Lord,  Increase  our  faith. 
And  the  Lord  said.  If  ye  had  faith  as  a  grain  of 
mustard-seed,  ye  might  say  unto  this  sycamine- 
tree.  Be  thou  phicked  up  by  the  root,  and  be  thou 
planted  in  the  sea;  and  it  should  obey  you.  But 
which  of  you,  having  a  servant  ploughing  or  feed- 
ing cattle,  will  say  unto  him  by  and  by,  when  he 
is  come  from  the  field,  Go  and  sit  down  to  meat? 
and  w'\\\  not  rather  say  unto  him,  Make  ready 
wherewith  1  may  sup,  and  gird  thyself,  and  serve 
me,  till  1  have  eaten  and  drunken  ;  and  afterward 
thou  shalt  eat  and  drink?  Doth  he  thank  that 
servant  because>e  did  the  things  that  were  com- 
manded him  ?  I  trow  not.  Ho  likewise  ye,  when 
ye  shall  have  done  all  those  things  which  are  com- 
manded you,  say,  We  are  unprofitable  servants  : 
we  have  done  that  which  was  our  duty  to  do. 

*  And  he  spake  a  parable  unto  them  to  this 
end,  that  men  ought  always  to  pray,  and  not  to 
faint :  saying,  There  was  in  a  city  a  judge,  which 
feared  not  (iod,  neither  regardt^d  man  :  and  there 
was  a  widow  in  that  city :  and  she  came  unto 
him,  saying,  Avenge  me  of  mine  adversary.  And 
he  would  not  for  a  while :  but  afterward  he  said 
within  himself.  Though  I  fear  not  God,  nor  regard 
man  ;  yet  because  this  widow  troubleth  me,  I  will 
avenge  her,  lest  by  her  contiimal   coming    she 

*  Tiuke,  c'nap.  xviii.  1. 


weary  me.  And  the  Lord  said,  Hear  what  the 
unjust  judge  saith.  And  shall  not  God  avenge 
his  own  elect,  which  cry  day  and  night  unto  him, 
though  he  bear  long  with  them  ?  I  tell  you  that 
he  will  avenge  them  speedily.  Nevertheless  when 
the  Son  of  man  cometh,  shall  he  find  faith  on  the 
earth  ? 

And  he  spake  this  parable  unto  certain  which 
trusted  in  themselves  that  they  were  righteous, 
and  despised  others  :  Two  men  went  up  into  the 
temple  to  pray  ;  the  one  a  Pharisee,  and  the  other 
a  Publican.  The  Pharisee  stood  and  prayed  thus 
with  himself:  God,  I  thank  thee,  that  I  am  not  as 
other  men  are,  extortioners,  mijust,  adulterers,  or 
even  as  this  Publican.  I  fiist  twice  in  the  week,  I 
give  tithes  of  all  that  I  possess.  And  the  Publi- 
can, standing  afar  off,  would  not  lift  up  so  much 
as  his  eyes  unto  heaven,  but  smote  upon  his 
breast,  saying,  God  be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner.  I 
tell  you,  this  man  went  down  to  his  house  justified 
rather  than  the  other:  for  everyone  that  exalteth 
himself  shall  be  abase(»  •  and  he  that  humbleth 
himself  shall  be  exalted. 

And  they  brought  unto  him  also  infants,  thai  he 
would  touch  them  :  but  when  his  disciples  saw  it, 
they  rebuked  them.  But  Jesus  called  them  unto 
hint,  and  said.  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto 
me,  and  forbid  them  not :  for  of  such  is  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Whosoever 
shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little 
child  shall  in  no  wise  entei  therein. 

15 


li 


/ 


9 

'       I. 


T 


Mi 


And  a  certain  ruler  asked  him,   saying,   Good 
Master,  what   shall   I  do  to  inherit  eternal  life  ? 
And  Jesus  said   unto  him,  Whv  callest  thou  me 
<Tood  ?  none  is  good,  save  one,  inat  is,  God.  Thou 
knovvost  the  commandments.  Do  not  commit  adul- 
tery, Do  not  kill.  Do  not  steal,  Do  not  bear  false 
witness,  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother.     And 
he  said,  All  those  have  I  kept  from  my  youth  up. 
Now  when  Jesus  heard  these  things,  he  said  unto 
him,  Yet  lackest  thou  one  thing  :  sell  all  that  thou 
hast,  and  distribute  unto  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt 
have   treasure  in  heaven  :  and  come,  follow  me. 
And  when  he  heard  this,  he  was  very  sorrowful : 
for  he  was  very  rich.     And  when  Jesus  saw  that 
he  was  very  sorrowful,  he  said,  How  hardly  shall 
they  that  have   riches  enter  into  the   kingdom  of 
God  !     For  it  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through 
a  needle's  eye,  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God.     And   they  that  heard  it 
said.  Who  then  can  be  saved  ?  And  he  said,  The 
things  which  are  impossible  with  men  are  possible 
with^God.     Then  Peter  said,  Lo,  we  have  left  all, 
and  followed  thee.     And  he  said  unto  them,  Ve- 
rily 1  say  unto  you.  There  is  no  man  that  hath  left 
house,  or  parents,  or  brethren,  or  wife,  or  children, 
for  the  kingdom  of  God's  sake,  who  shall  not  re- 
ceive manifold  more  in  this  present  time,  and  in  the 
world  to  come  life  everlasting. 

*  lie  said  therefore,  A  certain  nobleman  went 
into  a  far  country  to  receive  for  himself  a  king- 

*  Luke,  chap.  xix.  12. 


i 


91 

dom,  and  to  return.  And  he  called  his  ten  ser- 
vants, and  delivered  them  ten  pounds,  and  said 
unto  them,  Occupy  till  I  come.  But  his  citizens 
hated  him,  and  sent  a  message  after  him,  saying, 
We  will  not  have  this  man  to  reign  over  us.  And 
it  came  to  pass,  that  when  he  was  returned,  hav- 
ing received  the  kingdom,  then  he  commanded 
these  servants  to  be  called  unto  him,  to  whom  he 
had  given  the  money,  thai  he  might  know  how 
much  every  man  had  gained  by  trading.  Then 
came  the  first,  saying.  Lord,  thy  pound  hath  gain- 
ed ten  pounds.  And  he  said  unto  him,  Well, 
thou  good  servant  :  because  thou  hast  been  faith- 
ful in  a  very  little,  have  thou  authority  over  ten 
cities.  And  the  *5econd  came,  saying.  Lord,  thy 
pound  hath  gained  five  pounds.  And  he  said  like- 
wise to  him,  Be  thou  also  over  five  cities.  And 
another  came,  saying,  I^ord,  behold,  here  is  thy 
pound,  which  I  have  kept  laid  up  in  a  napkin  :  for 
I  feared  thee,  because  thou  art  an  austere  man  : 
thou  takest  up  that  thou  layedst  not  down,  and 
reapest  that  thou  didst  not  sow.  And  he  saith 
unto  him,  Out  of  thine  own  mouth  will  I  judge 
thee,  thou  wicked  servant.  Thou  knewest  that  I 
was  an  austere  man,  taking  up  that  I  laid  not 
down,  and  reaping  that  I  did  not  sow  :  wherefore 
then  gavest  not  thou  my  money  into  the  bank, 
that  at  my  coming  I  might  have  required  mine 
own  with  usury  ?  And  he  said  unto  them  that 
stood  by,  Take  from  him  the  pound,  and  give  it 
to  him  that  hath  ten  pounds.     (And  they  said 


'I 


1  i 


: 


4^ 


1)2 

unto  him,  Lord,  he  hath  ten  pounds.)     For  I  say 
unto  you,  That  unto  every  one  which  hath  shall 
be  given  ;  and  from  him  that  hath  not,  even  that 
he  hath  shall  be  taken  away  from  him.     But  those 
mine  enemies,  which  would  not  that  I  should  reigu 
over  them,  bring  hither,  and  slay  iliem  before  me. 
*  And  the  Chief  Priests  and  the  Scribes  the 
same  hour  sought  to  lay  hands  on  him  ;  and  ihey 
feared  the  people  :  for  they  perceived  that  he  had 
spoken    this   parable  against    them.       And  they 
wat<h(^d  him,  and  sent  forth  spies,  which  should 
feign  themselves  just  men,  that  they  might  take 
hold  of  his  words,  that  so  they  might  deliver  him 
unto  the  power  and  authority  of  the  governor. 
And  they  asked  him,  saying,   Master,  we  know^ 
that  thou  sayest  and  teachest  rightly,  neither  ac- 
ceptest  thou  the  person  of  any,  but  teachest  the 
way  of  God  truly  :  Is  it  lawful  for  us  to  give  tri- 
bute unto  Cspsar,  or  no  ?     But  he  perceived  their 
craftiness,  and  said  unto  them,  Why  tempt  ye  me  ? 
Show  me  a  penny.   Whose  image  and  superscrip- 
tion hath  it  ?     They  answered  and  said,  Ciesar's. 
And  he  said  unto  them.   Render  thrrefure  unto 
Caesar  the  things  which  be  Caesar's,  and  unto  God 
the  things  which  be  God's.     And  they  could  not 
take  hold   of  his  words  before  the   people  :  and 
they  marveUed  at  his  answer,  and  held  their  peace. 
Then  came  to  him  certain  of  the  Sadducees,  which 
deny  that  there  is  any  resurrection ;  and  they  asked 
him,  saying,  Master,  Moses  wrote  unto  us.  If  any 

*  Luke,  chap.  xx.  [19.]  20. 


9a 

man's  brother  die,  having  a  wife,  and  he  die  with- 
out children,  that  his  brother  should  take  his  wife, 
and  raise  up  seed  unto  his  brotlier.     1  here  were 
therefore  seven  brethren :  and  the  first  took  a  wife, 
and  died  without  children.     And  the  second  took 
her  to  wife,  and  he  died  childless.     And  the  third 
took  her;  and  in  like  manner  the  seven  also:  and 
they  left  no  children,  and  died.     Last  of  all  the 
woman  dic^l  also.     IMiercfore  in  the  resurrection 
whose  wife  of  them  is  she  ?  for  seven  had  her  to 
wife.     And  Jesus  answering  said  unto  them,  The 
children  of  this  world   marry,  and  are  given  in 
marriage :    but  they  which  shall    be    accounted 
worthy  to  obtain  that  world,  and  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in 
marriage:  neither   can   they  die  any   more:  for 
they  are  equal  unto  the  angels  ;  and  are  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  being  the  children  of  the  resurrec- 
tion.    Now  that  the  dead  are  raised,  even  Moses 
shewed  at  the  bush,  when  he  calleth  the  Lord  the 
God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the 
God  of  Jacob.     For  he  is  not  a  God  of  the  dead, 
but  of  the   living:  for  all  live  unto  him.     Then 
certain    of   the  Scribes  answering  said,  Master, 
thou  hast  well  said. 

*  And  he  looked  up,  and  saw  the  rich  men  cast- 
ing their  gifts  into  the  treasury.  And  he  saw  also 
a  certain  poor  widow  (tasting  in  thither  two  mites. 
And  he  said.  Of  a  truth  I  say  unto  you,  that  this 
poor  widow  hath  cast  in  more  than  thev  all :  for 

*  Luke,  chap.xxi.  1. 


i\ 


i 


iiil 


n 


y4 

all  these  have  of  their  abundance  cast  in  unto  the 
offerings  of  God  :  but  she  of  her  penury  hath  cast 
in  all  the  living  that  she  had. 

*  There  was  a  man  of  the  Pharisees,  named 
Nicpdemus,  a  ruler  of  the  Jews :  the  same  came 
to  Jesus  by  night,  and   said  unto  him.  Rabbi,  we 
know  that  thou  art  a  teacher  come  from  God  :  for 
no  man  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest,  ex- 
cept God  be  with  him.     Jesus  answered  and  said 
unto  him.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  Except  a 
man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of 
God.     Nicodemus  saith  unto  him.  How  can  a  man 
be  born  when  he  is  okl  ?    Can  he  enter  the  second 
time  into  his  mother's  womb,  and  be  born  ?  Jesus 
answered,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee.  Except 
a  man  be  born   of  water  and   of  the  Spirit,^  he 
cannot  enter   into  the  kingdom   of  God.     That 
which  is  born  of  the  tlesh  is  flesh  ;  and  that  which 
is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit.     Marvel  not  that  I 
said  unto  thee.  Ye  must  be  born  again.     The  wind 
bloweih   where   it  listeth,  and    thou  hearest   the 
sound  thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh, 
and  whither  it  goeth  :    so  is  every  one  that  is  born 
of  the    Spirit.      Nicodemus   answered  and    said 
unto  him.  How  can  these  things  be.?     Jesus  an- 
swered and  said   unto  him.  Art  thou  a  master  of 
Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things?     Verily, 
verily,  I   say   unto  thee,   We  speak  that  we  do 
know,  and  testify  that  we  have  seen ;  and  ye  re- 

*  John,  chap.  iii.  1- 


95 

ceive  not  our  witness.     If  I  have  told  you  earthly 
things,  and  ye  believe  not,  how  shall  ye  believe,  if 
I  tell  you  of  heavenly  things  ?     And  no  man  hath 
ascended  up  to  heaven,  but  he  that  came  down 
from  heaven,  even  the   Son  of  mun  which   is  in 
heaven.     And  as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in 
the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be 
lifted  up:  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should 
not  perish,  but  have  eternal   life.     For  God   so 
loved  the  world,  that  he   gave  his  only-begotten 
Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in    him  should  not 
perish,   but  have  everlasting  life.     For  God  sent 
not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world  ; 
but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved. 
He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  condemned  :  but 
he  that  believeth   not  is  condemned  already,  be- 
cause he  hath  not  believed  in  the  name  of  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  God.     And  this  is  the  condem- 
nation, that  light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men 
loved  darkness   rather  than   light,   because  their 
deeds  were  evil.     For  every  one  that  doeth  evil 
hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to  the  light,  lest 
his  deeds  should  be  reproved.     But  he  that  doeth 
truth  cometh  to  the  light,  that  his  deeds  may  be 
made  manifest,  that  they  are  wrought  in  God. 

*  But  the  hour  corneth,  and  now  is,  when  the 
true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit 
and  in  truth  :  for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  wor- 
ship  him.  God  is  a  Spirit ;  and  they  that  worship 
him  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 

^  .Tohn,  chap.  iv.  <23. 


\ 


I,, 


I 


M 


|j 


it  II 


I 


DO 


97 


*  Labour  not  for  the  meat  which  perisheth,  but 
lor  that  meat  wliich  enclureth  unto  everlasting  life, 
which  the  Son  of  man  shall  give  unto  you  ;  for 
him  hath  God  the  Father  sealed. 

t  And  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  brought  unto 
him  a  woman  taken  in  adultery  ;  and  when  they 
had  set  her  in  the  midst,  they  say  unto  him.  Mas- 
ter, this  woman  was  taken  in  adultery,  in  the  very 
act.     Now  Moses  in  the  law  commanded  us,  that 
such  should  be  stoned  :  but  what  sayest  thou  ? 
This  they   said,  tempting   him,  that  they   might 
have  to  accuse  him.     But  Jesus  stooped   down, 
and  with  his  finger  wrote  on  the  ground,  as  though 
he  heard  them  mot.     So  when  they  continued  ask- 
ing him,  he  lifted  up  himself,  and  said  unto  them, 
He  that  is  without  sin  among  you,   let  him   first 
cast  a  stone  at  her.     And  again  he  stooped  down, 
and  wrote  on  the  ground.    And  they  which  heard 
it,  being  convicted  by  their  otcn  conscience,  went 
out  one  by  one,  beginning  at  the  eldest,  evcnuulo 
the  last :  and  Jesus  was  left  alone,  and  the  wo- 
man standing  in   the   midst.     When   Jesus  had 
lifted  up  himself,  and  saw  none  but  the  woman, 
he  said  unto  her,  Woman,  where  are  those  thine 
accusers  ?     Hath  no  man  condemned  thee  ?  She 
said,  No  man.  Lord.     And   Jesus  said  unto  her, 
Neither  do  1  condemn  thee  :  go,  and  sin  no  more. 

t  And  Jesus  said,  For  judgment  1  am  come  into 


*  John,  cliap.  vi.  27. 
^  .Tolui.  cliap.  viii.  S. 


I  John,  ciiap.  ix.  ^^. 


this  world,  that  they  which  see  not  might  see  ;  and 
that  they  which  see  might  be  made  blind.  And 
some  of  the  Pharisees  which  were  with  him  heard 
these  words,  and  said  unto  him.  Are  we  blind 
also  ?  Jesus  said  unto  them.  If  ye  were  blind,  ye 
should  have  no  sin :  but  now  ye  say.  We  see ; 
therefore  your  sin  remaineth. 

*  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  hus- 
bandman. Every  branch  in  me  that  beareth  not 
fruit  he  taketh  away  :  and  every  branch  that  bear- 
eth fruit,  he  purgeth  it,  that  it  may  bring  forth 
more  fruit.  Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  word 
which  I  have  spoken  unto  you.  Abide  in  me,  and 
I  in  you.  As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  it- 
self, except  it  abide  in  the  vine  ;  no  more  can  ye, 
except  ye  abide  in  me.  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the 
branches :  he  that  abideth  in  me,  and  f  in  him, 
the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit:  for  without 
me  ye  can  do  nothing.  If  a  man  abid(»  not  in  me, 
he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch,  and  is  withered  ;  and 
men  gather  them,  and  cast  them  into  the  fire,  and 
they  are  burned.  If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my 
wwds  abide  in  vou,  ye  shall  ask  wh  it  ve  vvjjl,  und 
it  shall  be  done  unto  you.  Herein  is  ?ny  father  do- 
rified,  that  ye  bear  much  fruit;  so  shall  ye  be  my 
disciples.  As  the  Father  hath  loved  me,  so  have 
I  loved  you  :  continue  ye  in  my  love.  If  ye  ke«  p 
my  commandments,  ye  shall  abide  in  my  love  ; 
even  as  1  have  kept  my  Father's  commandments, 

''''  John,  chap.  xv.  1. 

16 


I'  .11 


If 


i 


4 


*^\ 


and  nhidein  liis  love.  Tliese  things  have  I  spoken 
unto  yoii,  thai  my  joy  niii^ht  n*maiii  in  you,  and 
that  your  joy  might  be  lull.  This  is  my  com- 
mandment, That  ye  love  one  another,  as  I  have 
loved  you.  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this, 
that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends.  Ye 
are  my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command 
vou.  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants  ;  for  the 
servant  knoweth  not  what  his  lord  doeth :  but  I 
have  called  you  friends  ;  for  all  things  that  I  have 
heard  of  my  Father  I  have  made  known  unto  you. 
Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  1  have  chosen  you, 
and  ordained  you,  that  ye  should  go  and  bring 
forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  remain  :  that 
whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  of  the  Father  in  my  name, 
he  may  give  it  you.  These  things  1  command 
you,  that  ye  love  one  another. 


AN 


APPEAL. 


TO 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PUBLIC, 


0 


IN    DEFENCE    OF    THE 


<^  PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS.^ 


BY 


A  FRIEND  TO  TRUTH. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION. 


BOSTON: 


Christian  Register  Office. 


1828. 


W' 


\  f 


/r 


and  nhidein  his  love.  Tliese  things  have  I  spoken 
uiiio  you,  that  my  joy  might  ri^maiii  in  you,  and 
that  your  joy  might  hv  full.  This  is  my  com- 
mandment, That  ye  love  one  another,  as  I  have 
loved  you.  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this, 
that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends.  Ye 
are  my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  1  command 
you.  Henceforth  1  call  you  not  servants  ;  for  the 
servant  knoweth  not  what  his  lord  doeth :  but  I 
have  called  you  friends  ;  for  all  things  that  I  have 
heard  of  my  Father  I  have  made  known  unto  you. 
Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  1  have  chosen  you, 
and  ordained  you,  that  ye  should  go  and  bring 
forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  remain  :  that 
whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  of  the  Father  in  my  name, 
he  may  give  it  you.  These  things  I  command 
you,  that  ye  love  one  another. 


i 


AN 


APPEAL 


TO 


THE  CIIRISTIAA^ 


IN    DEFENCE    OF    THE 


^PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS.^ 


BY 


A  FRIEND  TO  TRUTH. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION. 


BOSTON: 
€HRiSTiAPi  Register  Office. 

182S. 


i 


'I- 


h  ,1 


,M 


it 


fl 


i^:  ij 


i\ 


Ai\  APPEAL, 


m 


I 


;'' 


In  perusing  the  twentieth  number  of  "  The 
Friend  of  India,"  I  felt  as  much  surprised  as  dis- 
appointed at  some  remarks  made  in  that  magazine, 
by  a  gentleman  under  the  signature  of  "  A  Chris- 
tian Missionary,"  on  a  late  publication,  entitled, 
"  The  Precepts  of  Jesus  ;"  and  also  at  some  ob- 
servations of  a  similar  nature  on  the  same  subject 
by  the  editor  of  that  publication.  Before,  how- 
ever, I  attempt  to  inquire  into  the  ground  upon 
which  their  objections  to  the  work  in  question  are 
founded,  I  humbly  beg  to  appeal  to  the  public 
against  the  unchristianlike,  as  well  as  uncivil  man- 
ner in  which  the  Editor  has  adduced  his  objections 
to  the  compilation,  by  introducing  personality,  and 
applying  the  term  of  heathen  to  the  Compiler.  I 
say  unchristianlike  manner,  because  the  Editor, 
by  making  use  of  the  term  heathen,  has,  I  pre- 
sume, violated  truth,  charity,  and  liberality,  which 
are  essential  to  Christianity  in  every  sense  of  the 
word.  For  there  are  only  two  methods  by  which 
the  character  of  the  Compiler  as  a  heathen,  or  as 
a  believer  in  one  true  and  living  God,  can  be  sa- 
tisfactorily inferred.     The  most  reasonable  of  the 


I  ii, 


M 


102 

two  modes  is  to  confine  such  inquiries  to  tlie  evi- 
dence contained  in  the  subject  of  review,  no  men- 
tion of  the  name  of  the  Compiler  being  made  in 
the  publication  itself.     Another  mode,   which  is 
obviously  inapplicable  in  such  discussions,  is  to 
guess  at  the  real  author,  and  to  infer  his  opinions 
from  a  knowledge  of  his  education  or  other  cir- 
cumstances.    With  respect  to  the  first  source  of 
evidence,  the  following  expressions  of  the  Compi- 
ler's sentiments,   are   found   in   the  Introduction. 
"  A  notion  of  the  existence  of  a  Supreme  Super- 
intending Power,  the  author  and  preserver  of  the 
harmonious  system,  who  has  organized,  and  who 
regulates  such  an  infinity  of  celestial  and  terres- 
trial  objects,  and   a  due  estimation   of  that  law 
which  teaches  that  man  should  do  to  others  as  he 
would  wish  to  be  done  by,  reconcile  us  to  human 
nature,"  &c.     "  This  simple  code  of  religion  and 
morality,  (meaning  the  Fre(e{)ts  of  Jesus,)  is  so 
admirably  calculated   to  elevate  men's   ideas  to 
high  and  liberal   notions  of  one  God,"  &c.  "  so 
well  fitted  to  regulate  tlic  conduct  of  the  human 
race  in  the  discharge  of  their  various  duties  to 
God,  to  themselves,  and  to  society,"  and  **  so  con- 
formable to  the  dictates  of  luunan  reason  and  di- 
vine revelation,"  &c.     These  expressions  are  cal- 
culated, in  my  hurnble  opinion,  to  convince  every 
mind  not  biassed  by  prejudice,  that  the  Compiler 
believed  not  only  in  one  God,  uh(»se  nature  and  es- 
sence is  beyond  human  cnmpn  hi  nsion,  but  itJ  t|:e 
truths  revealed  in  the  Christian  system.     1  sliuuld 


10;^ 

hope  neither  the  Reviewer  nor  the  Editor  can  be 
justified  in  inferring  the  heathenism  of  the  Compi- 
ler, from  the  facts  of  his  extracting  and  publishing 
the  moral  doctrines  of  the  New  Testament,  under 
the  title  of  "  A  Guide  to  Peace  and  Happiness" 
—his  styling  the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  a  code  of  re- 
ligion and  moraliiy~his  believing  God  to  be  the 
author  and  pn^server  of  the  universe— or  his  con- 
sidering those  sayings  as  adapted  to  regulate  the 
conduct  of  the  whole  human  race  in  the  discharge 
of  all  the  duties  required  of  them. 

Neither,  I  trust,  can  his  separating  the  moral 
sayings  of  Christ  from  the  mysterious  dogmas  and 
historical  parts  of  the  New  Testament,  under  the 
impression,  that  these  are  liable  to  the  doubts  and 
disputes  of  freethinkers  and  anti-christians,  with 
which    this  part    of  the    world    is  unfortunately 
filled  ;  nor  his  opinion   that  this  simple  code  of 
morality  would  be   more  likely  to  attract  the  no- 
tice and   respect  of  such  men,  and  to  guide  their 
minds  into  the  paths  of  peace  and  happiness,  than 
if  presented   to  them   in  conjunction   with   other 
matter  against  which  their  education  has  taught 
them  to  revolt ;  justly  subject  him,  in  the  opinion 
of  the  most  orthodox  Christians,  to   the  epithet 
applied  to  him  by  the  Editor.     If  they  do,  I  can- 
not see  how  the  same  condemnation  can  be  spared 
to  numerous  publications   of  extracts  from   the 
Old   and   the   New  Testaments,  made  and  sent 
forth  by  several  Christian  authors,  under  various 
designations,  and  for  difterent  purposes. 


y 


0 


it 


lOi     . 

With  respect  to  the  latter  mode  of  seeking  evi- 
dence, however  unjustified  the   Editor  may  be  in 
coming  to  such   a  conclusion,  he  is  safe   in  ascri- 
bing the  collection  of  these  Precepts  to  Rammo- 
hun  Roy ;  who,  although   he  was  born  a  Brah- 
mun,  not  only  renounced  idolatry  at  a  very  early 
period  of  his  life,  but  published  at  that   time  ii 
treatise  in  Arabic  and   Persian   against  that  sys- 
tem ;  and  no  sooner  acquired  a   tolerable  know- 
ledge of  English,  than   he  made   his  desertion  of 
idoF  worship  known  to  the  Christian  world  by  his 
English  publication— a  renunciation  that,   I    am 
sorry  to  say,  brought  severe  difficulties  upon  him, 
by  exciting  the   displeasure  of  his  parents,   and 
subjecting  him  to  the  dislike  of  his  near,  as  well 
as  distant  relations,  and  to  the  hatred  of  nearly  all 
his  countrymen    for   several   yc^ars.     I   therefore 
presume,  that  among  his  declared  enemies,  who 
are  aware  of  those  facts,  no  one  who  has  the  least 
pretension   to   truth,  would   venture  to  apply  the 
designation  of  heathen   to  him  ;  but   I   am   sure, 
that  the  respect  he  entertains  for   the   very  name 
of  Christianity,  which  the    Editor  of  the  Friend 
of  India  seems  to  profess,  will  restrain   him  from 
retorting  on  that  Editor,  alihough   there  may  be 
differences  of  opinion  between   them,  that  might 
be  thought  sufficient  to  justify  the  use  towards  the 
Editor  of  a   term  no  less  offensive.     The  FaUiov 
perhaps  may  consider  himself  justified  by  nume- 
rous precedents  amongst  tiie  several  partisans  of 
different  Christian  sects,  in  applying  the  name  of 


105 

heathen  to  one  who  takes  the  Precepts  of  Jesus 
as  his  principal  guide  in  matters  of  religious  and 
civil  duties ;  as  Roman  Catholics  bestow  the  ap- 
pellation of  heretics  or  infidels  on  all  classes  of 
Protestants,  and  Protestants  do  not  spare  the  title 
of  idolators  to    Roman    Catholics ;    Trinitarians 
deny  the  name  of  Christian   to  l^nitarians,  while 
the  latter  retort  by  stigmatizing  the  worshippers 
of  the  Son  of  man  as  Pagans,  who  adore  a  cre- 
ated and  dependent  Being.     Very  diflferent  con- 
duct is  inculcated  in  the  precept  of  Jesus  to  John, 
when  complaining  of  one  who  performed   cures 
in  the  name  of  Jesus,  yet  refused   to  follow  the 
apostles : — he  gave  a  rebuke,  saying,  "  He  that  is 
not  against  us  is  on  our  part :"  Mark,  ch.  ix.  ver. 
40.     The  Compiler,  having  obviously  in  view  at 
least  one  object  in   common   with  the  Reviewer 
and  Editor,  that  of  procuring  respect  for  the  pre- 
cepts of  Christ,  might  have  reasonably  expected 
more  charity  from  professed  teachers  of  his  doc- 
trines. 

The  Compiler  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  will 
however,  I  doubt  not,  give  preference  to  the 
guidance  of  those  Precepts,  which  justify  no  re- 
taliation even  upon  enemies,  to  the  hasty  sugges- 
tions of  human  passions,  and  the  example  of  the 
Editor  of  the  Friend  of  India. 

2.  The  Editor  of  the  Friend  of  India,  and  the 
respected  Reviewer,  both  not  oidy  disapprove  ab- 
solutely the  plan  adopted  by  the  Compiler  in  se- 
parating the  moral  doctrines  of  the  boolis  of  the 

17 


I 


W 


'  f  lU 


''.3S^' 


106 

New  Testament  ascribed  to  the  four  Evangelists 
from  the  mysteries  and  historical  matters  therein 
contained,  but  even  blame  him  as  aninjurer  of  the 
cause  <.f  truth  ;  and  for  such  disapprobation  they 
assign  several  reasons :  first,  The  Reviewer  says, 
the  supi)osition  of  the  moral  sayings  being  suffi- 
cient for   salvation,  independent  of  the  dogmas, 
is,  (as  he  notes  in  page  27,)  radically  false  ;  and 
that  it  is  presumption  of  him  (ihe  Compiler)  to 
think  himself  qualified  to  judge,  independently 
of  the  Divine  Teacher,  what  sort  of  instruction  is 
advantageous  for  the  happiness  of  mankind.     If, 
indeed,  the  Reviewer  understands  by  the  word 
moral'  what    relates  to    conduct   only   with   re- 
ference to  man,  it  cannot  apply  to  those  precepts 
of  Jesus,   that  teach  the   duty  of  man  to  God; 
which,  however,  the  Reviewer  will  find  included 
in  the  collection  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus  by  the 
Compiler :  but  a  slight  attention  to  the  scope  ot 
the  Introduction  miglit  have  convinced   the  Re- 
viewer, that  the  sense  in  which  the  word  moral  is 
there  used,  whether  rightly  or  otherwise,  is  quite 
general,  and  applies  equally  to  our  conduct  in  re- 
ligious as  in  civil  matters.     Without  attaching  this 
meaning  to  the   term  moral  doctrines,  the  whole 
of  the  concluding  sentence  must  appear  absurd, 
where  it  is  said,  "  '1  his  simple  code  is  well  fitted 
to  regulate  she  conduct  of  the  human  race  in  the 
discharge  of  their  various  duties  to  God,  to  them- 
selves, and  to  society."     This  assertion  is  corro- 
borated and  supported  by  a  great  number  of  pas- 


107 

sages  in  the  treatise  in  question,  which  point  out 
the  appropriate  mode  of  performing  our  duty  to 
the  Almighty  Power.  It  is,  however,  too  true  to 
be  denied,  that  the  Compiler  of  those  moral  pre- 
cepts separated  them  from  some  of  the  dogmas 
and  other  matters,  chiefly  under  the  supposition, 
that  they  alone  were  a  sufficient  guide  to  secure 
peace  and  happiness  to  mankind  at  large — a  posi- 
tion that  is  entirely  founded  on  and  supported  by 
the  express  authorities  of  Jesus  of  Nazaretii — a 
denial  of  which  would  imply  a  total  disavowal  of 
Christianity.  Some  of  those  authorities,  as  found 
amongst  these  precepts,  here  follow:  Matthew, 
ch.  xxii.  beginning  with  ver.  37 :  "  Jesus  said 
unto  him.  Thou  shall  love  the  Lord  thv  God  with 
all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all 
thy  mind.  38.  This  is  the  first  and  great  com- 
mandment. 39.  And  the  second  is  like  unto  it, 
Thou  shalt  love  thy  neiirhbour  as  thyself.  40.  On 
THESE  rw»  coM.H\Nn\fr.\rs  h\.\<j  all  thf  L  \vv 
AND  THE  Prdphets."  Muvk,  ch.  xii.  be^iirunng 
with  ver.  29  :  *'  And  Jesus  answered  him.  The 
first  of  all  the  commandments  is,  Hear,  O  Israel,  the 
Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord.  30.  Thou  shalt  love 
the  Lord  ihyGod  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all 
thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  with  all  thy 
streni^th.  Thisisthe  first  commandment.  31.  And 
the  second  is  like,  namely  this  :  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself:  there  is  no  other  com- 
mandment greater  than  these.  32.  And  he  said 
wnto  him,  Well,  Master,  thou  hast  said  the  truth  ; 


W 


1 1' 


* 


u 


I     ! 


'I 


mr^' 


108 

for  there  is  one  God,  and  there  is  none  other  but 
he.     33.  And  to  love  him  with  all  the  heart,  with 
all  the  understanding,  and  with  all  the  soul,  and 
with  all  the  strength,  and  to  love  his  neighbour  as 
himself,  is  more  than  all   burnt-(»fferings  and  sa- 
crifices.    3^.   And  when  Jesus   saw  that  he   an- 
swered discreetlv,  he  said  unto  him,  Thou  art  not 
far  from  the  kingdom  of  God."     Matthew,  ch.  vii. 
ver.  12:    "Therefore    all   things    whatever  you 
would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  you  even  so 
to  men  ;  for  this  is  thk  Law  and  the  Prophets. 
Ch.  V.     Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the 
Law  or  Prophets  ;  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but 
to  fulfil."     Luke,  ch.  x.   beginning  with  ver.  25  : 
«  And   behold,  a   certain    lawyer  stood    up  and 
tempted  him,  saying.  Master,  what  shall  1   do  to 
inherit  eternal  life  ?     26.  He  said  unto  him.  What 
is  written  in    the    Law?     How    readest    thou? 
27.   He  answering  said.  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 
thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  strength, 
and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbour  as  thy- 
self.    2a.  And  he  said  unto  him,  Thou  hast  an- 
swered right.     This  do  and   thou  shalt  live." 
The   Saviour  meant  of  course  by  the  words  Law 
and  Prophetic,  all  the  commandments  ordained  by 
divine  authority   and  the  religion  revealed   to  the 
prophets  and   observed  by  them;  as   is  evident 
from  Jesus's  declaring  those  commandments  to 
afford  perfect  means  of  acquiring  eternal  life,  and 
directing  men  to  follow  them  accordmgly.     Had 
any  other  doctrine  been  requisite  to  teach  men 


109 

the  road  to  peace  and  happiness,  Jesus  could  not 
have  pronounced  to  the  lawyer,  "  This  do  and 
thou  shalt  live."  It  was  the  characteristic  of 
the  office  of  Christ  to  teach  men,  that  forms  and 
ceremonies  were  useless  tokens  of  respect  for 
God,  compared  with  the  essential  proof  of  obe- 
dience and  love  towards  him  evinced  by  the  prac- 
tice of  beneficence  towards  their  fellow-creatures. 
The  Compiler,  finding  these  commandments  given 
as  including  all  the  revealed  law,  and  the  whole 
system  of  religion  adopted  by  the  prophets,  and 
re-established  and  fulfilled  by  Jesus  himself,  as  the 
means  to  acquire  peace  and  happiness,  was  desi- 
rous of  giving  more  full  publicity  in  this  country 
to  them,  and  to  the  subsidiary  moral  doctrines  that 
are  introduced  by  the  Saviour  in  detail.  Placing 
also  implicit  confidence  in  the  truth  of  his  sacred 
commandments,  to  the  observance  of  which  we 
are  directed  by  the  same  Teacher,  {John,  ch.  xiv. 
ver.  16.  "  If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  command- 
ments ;"  ver.  24,  "  He  that  loveth  me  not,  keep- 
eth  not  my  sayings,")  the  Compiler  never  hesitated 
in  declaring  (pnge  1.)  "a  belief  in  God,  and  a 
due  regard  to  that  law,  *  Do  unto  others  as  you 
would  wish  to  be  done  by,'  render  our  existence 
agreeable  to  ourselves,  and  profitable  to  the  rest 
of  mankind."  It  may  now  bo  left  to  the  public 
to  judge,  whether  or  not  the  charge  of  arrogance 
and  presumption  which  the  Reviewer  has  imputed 
to  the  Compiler,  under  the  idea  that  he  preferred 
his  own  judgment  to  that  of  the  Saviour,  be  justly 
applicable  to  him. 


II 

4l 


•' 


* 


\ 


11(1 

3    The  respected  Rc^viewer  argues  in  page  26, 
that  there  are  two  important  points,  a  knowledge 
of  which  is   not  to  be  acquired  by  f..ll<.wing  the 
moral  precepts  of  Christ,  but  which  are  essential 
to  the  attainment  of  true   peace  of  nnn.l ;  they 
being  entirely  founded   (as  he  alleges)  upon  the 
dogmas  and  histories,  viz.  how  to  obiam,  1st,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins,  and  tlie  favour  of  Go.l ;  a  nd 
2dly,  strength  to  overcome   human   passions,  and 
to  keep  the  commandments  of  God.     These  pre- 
cepts, separated  from  the  mysterious  dogmas  and 
historical  records,  appear,  on  the  contrary,  to  the 
Compiler,  to  contai..  not  ...dy  the  essence  of  al 
that  is  n.vessary  to  instruct  mankind  in  their  civil 
duties,  but  also  the  be.«t  and   only  m.  ans  of  ob- 
tainin-r  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins,  ih-  favour  ot 
God,  .nnd  strength  to  overcome  our  passio.i.s  and 
to  keep  his  commandments.      I  therefore  extract 
from  the  same  compilation  a  few  pa>sa!zes  of  that 
greatest  of  all  prophets,  who  was  sent  to  call  sin- 
ners to  repentance  ;  a  due  attention  to  which  will, 
I  hope,  satisfy  the   respected   Reviewer  on  those 
two  points.     Luke,  ch.  xi.i.  ver.  3  :  "  Except  you 
repent,  you  shall  all   likewise  perish."     Ch.  xv. 
ver.  7 :  "I  say  unto  you,  that  iikewi.-^e  joy  sfiall 
be  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repenteih,  more 
than  over  ninety  and  nine  persons  who  iiee.l   no 
repentance.     1  say   unto  you,  there  is  joy  in  the 
presence  of  the  angels  of  God  over  one  sinner 
that  repenteth."     MoUhcw,  ch.   ix.    "  1  am  not 
come  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repent- 


111 


ance."  Ch.  xviii.  "  For  the  Son  of  man  is  come 
to  save  that  whic;b  was  lost  "  Luke,  ch.  vi.  "  I 
came  not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  re- 
pentance." Which  sayings  are  confirmatory  of 
what  is  taught  in  Ezekiel,  ch.  xviii.  ver.  80 :  "  Re- 
pent and  turn  yourselves  from  all  your  transgres- 
sions, so  iniquity  hall  not  be  your  ruin."  See 
also  the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  where  the 
mercy  of  (iod  is  illustrated  by  the  example  of  a 
father  pardoning  the  transgressions  of  his  repent- 
ing son.  Numerous  passages  of  the  Old  and 
the  New  Testaments  to  the  same  effect,  which 
might  fill  a  volume,  distinctly  promise  us  that  the 
forgiveness  of  God  and  the  favour  of  his  Divine 
Majesty  may  be  obtained  by  sincere  repentance, 
as  required  of  sinners  by  the  Redeemer. 

As  to  the  second  point,  that  is,  How  to  be  ena- 
bled to  overcome  our  pas.sions,  and  keep  the  com- 
mandments of  God  : — we  are  not  left  unprovided 
for  in  thai  res()ect,  as  our  gracious  Saviour  has 
promised  every  strength  and  power  as  necessary 
consequences  of  earnest  prayer  and  hearty  de- 
sire. Matthew,  ch.  vii.  and  Luke,c\\.  vi.  "Ask, 
and  it  shall  be  given  you  ;  seek,  and  ye  shall  find  ; 
knock,  and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you."  "  If  ye 
then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto 
your  children,  how  much  more  shall  your  Father 
which  is  in  heaven  give  good  things  to  them  that 
ask  him  !"'  Luke,  ch.  xi.  "  I  say  unto  you.  Ask, 
and  it  shall  be  given  you."  After  a  due  attention 
to  these,  and  to  numerous  passages  of  the  same 


3      I 


/   '. 


M 


'i 


112 

edect,  no  one  who  believes  in  the  divine  message 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  or  even  in  the  truth  of  his 
doctrine  only,  can  be  at  all  at  a  loss  to  find  ade- 
quate means  of  attaining  those  two  ends,  justly 
considered  to  be  most  essential  by  the  Reviewer. 
4.  The  Reviewer  imputes  to  the  Compiler,  er- 
ror in  exalting  the   value   of  the  moral  doctrines 
above  that  of  the  historical  facts  and  dogmas  con- 
tained in  the  New   Testament.     This  imputation, 
I  humbly  maintain,  can  be  of  no  weight  or  force 
against  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself,  as  quoted 
in  the  above  texts  ;  which  clearly  show,  that  there 
is  no  other  means  of  attaining  eternal  life  except 
the  performance  of  our  duties  towards  God  in 
obeying  his  commandments.     That  the  aim  and 
object  of  all  the  commandments  of  God  is  to  teach 
us  our  duty  towards  our  fellow  creatures,  may  be 
gathered  from  a  hundred  passages  of  Scripture, 
of  which,    perhaps,    the    following    may  suffice. 
Matthew,  ch.  xxv.  ver.  31  :  "  When  the   Son  of 
man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  an- 
gels with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of 
his  glory.     And  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all 
nations:  and   he  shall   separate  them  one  from 
another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep  from 
the  goats.     And   he  shall   set  the  sheep  on   his 
right  hand,  but  the  goats  on  the  left.     Then  shall 
the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right  hand,  C'ome, 
ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom 
prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world. 
For  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me  meat :  f 


UiJ 


was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink :  I  was  a 
stranger,  and  ye  took  me  in  :  naked,  and  ye  clothed 
me  :  I  was  sick,  and  ye  visited  me :  I  was  in 
prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me.  Then  shall  the 
righteous  answer  him,  saying,  Lord,  when  saw 
we  thee  an  hungered,  and  fed  thee  ?  or  thirsty,  and 
gave  thee  drink  ?  When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger, 
and  took  thee  in?  or  naked,  and  clothed  thee? 
Or  when  saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came 
unto  thee  ?  And  the  King  shall  answer  and  say 
unto  them.  Verily  1  say  unto  you,  Inasmuch  as  ye 
have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these  my 
brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me.  Then  shall 
he  say  unto  them  also  on  the  left  hand.  Depart 
from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared 
for  the  devil  and  his  angels.  For  I  was  an  hun- 
gered, and  ye  gave  me  no  meat:  I  was  thirsty,  and 
ye  gave  me  no  drink :  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye 
took  me  not  in :  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me  not : 
sick,  and  in  prison,  and  ye  visited  me  not.  Then 
shall  they  also  answer  him,  saying.  Lord,  when 
saw  we  thee  an  hungered,  or  athirst,  or  a  stranger, 
or  naked,  or  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  did  not  minis- 
ter unto  thee  ?  Then  shall  he  an^<wer  them,  say- 
ing, Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it 
not  to  one  of  the  least  of  these,  ye  did  it  not  to 
me.  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment :  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal." 
In  this  description  of  the  day  of  judgment  it  is 
clearlv  announced,  that  the  merciful  Father  of  the 

18 


♦^i, 
r'' 


i] 


\' 


\  ( 


)! 


n 


112 

eftect,  no  one  who  believes  in  the  divine  message 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  or  even  in  the  truth  of  his 
doctrine  only,  can  be  at  all  at  a  loss  to  find  ade- 
quate means  of  attaining  those  two  ends,  justly 
considered  to  be  most  essential  by  the  Reviewer. 
4.  The  Reviewer  imputes  to  the  Compiler,  er- 
ror in  exalting  the   value   of  the  moral  doctrines 
above  that  of  the  historical  facts  and  dogmas  con- 
tained in  the  New   Testament.     This  imputation, 
I  humbly  maintain,  can  be  of  no  weight  or  force 
against  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself,  as  quoted 
in  the  above  texts  ;  which  dearly  show,  that  there 
is  no  other  means  of  attaining  eternal  life  except 
the  performance  of  our  duties  towards  God  in 
obeying  his  commandments.     That  the  aim  and 
object  of  all  the  commandments  of  God  is  to  teach 
us  oJir  duty  towards  our  fellow  creatures,  may  be 
gathered  from  a  hundred  passages  of  Scripture, 
of   which,    perhaps,    the    following    may   suffice.^ 
Matthew,  ch.  xxv.  ver.  31  :  "  When  the   Son  of 
man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  an- 
gels with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of 
his  glory.     And  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all 
nations:  and   he  shall   separate  them  one  from 
another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep  from 
the  goats.     And   he  shall   set  the  sheep  on   his 
right  hand,  but  the  goats  on  the  left.     Then  shall 
the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right  hand,  C'ome, 
ye  blessed  of  my   Father,   inherit  the  kingdom 
prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world. 
For  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave  mc  meat :  f 


113 


was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink :  I  was  a 
stranger,  and  ye  took  me  in  :  naked,  and  ye  clothed 
me  :  I  was  sick,  and  ye  visited  me :  1  was  in 
prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me.  Then  shall  the 
righteous  answer  him,  saying.  Lord,  when  saw 
we  thee  an  hungered,  and  fed  thee  ?  or  thirsty,  and 
gave  thee  drink  ?  When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger, 
and  took  thee  in?  or  naked,  and  clothed  thee? 
Or  when  saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came 
unto  thee  ?  And  the  King  shall  answer  and  say 
unto  them.  Verily  1  say  unto  you,  Inasmuch  as  ye 
have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these  my 
brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me.  Then  shall 
he  say  unto  them  also  on  the  left  hand.  Depart 
from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared 
for  the  devil  and  his  angels.  For  I  was  an  hun- 
gered, and  ye  gave  me  no  meat:  I  was  thirsty,  and 
ye  gave  me  no  drink :  I  was  a  ^^tranger,  and  ye 
took  me  not  in :  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me  not : 
sick,  and  in  prison,  and  ye  visited  me  not.  Then 
shall  they  also  answer  him,  saying.  Lord,  when 
saw  we  thee  an  hungered,  or  athirst,  or  a  stranger, 
or  naked,  or  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  did  not  minis- 
ter unto  thee  ?  Then  shall  he  answer  them,  say- 
ing. Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Inasmuch  as  ye  did  it 
not  to  one  of  the  least  of  these,  ye  did  it  not  to 
me.  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment :  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal." 
In  this  description  of  the  day  of  judgment  it  is 
clearly  announced,  that  the  merciful  Father  of  the 

18 


( 


I 


\  m 


\r 


I 


114 

universe  accepts  as  [a]  manifestation  of  love  to- 
wards himself,  every  act  of  charity  and  benefi- 
cence   performed   towards  his   creatures.      (See 
text  already  quoted,  Matthew,  ch.  vii.   ver.  12.) 
And  apparently  to  counteract  by  anticipation   the 
erroneous  idea  that  such  conduct  might  be  dis- 
pensed with,  and  rt^lianre  placed  on  a  mere  dog- 
matical knowledge  of  God,  or  of  the  Saviour,  the 
following  declaration  seems  to  have  been  uttered. 
Matthfir,  ch.  vii.  ver.  21  :  ^*  Not  every  one  that 
saith  unto  me,  Lord  I   Lord!  shall  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  but  he  that  doeth  the  wdl  of 
my  Vather  who  is  in  heaven.     Many  will  say  unto 
me  in  that  day,  Lord  !  Lord!  have  we   not   pro- 
phesied in  thy  name  ;  and  in  thy  nam(>  have  cast 
outdovils;  and  in  thy  name  done   many  wonder- 
ful works  ?     And  then  will   I  profess  unto  them,  I 
never  knew  yoji ;  depart   from  me,  ye  that  work 
iniquity.     Therefore  whosoever  heareth  thrsf  say- 
insrs  of  mine,  and   doeth   them,  I  will  liken  him 
umo  a  wise  man,  who  built  his  house  upon  a  r()ck. 
And  everyone  that  h(iareth  thoie  say  ins:s  of  imne, 
and  doeth  them  not,  shall  b(^  likened  unto  a  foolish 
man,  who  built  his  house  upon  th(^  sand."     Mat- 
thew, ch.  xii.  "  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of 
mv  Father  who  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my  bro- 
ther,    and    sister,  aiid   mother."      Luke,  ch.    ix. 
"  My  mother  and  my  brethren   are   those  which 
hear    the    word    of  God    and  do  it."     Ch.   xi. 
"  Blessed  is  the  womb  (said   a  certain  woman  to 
Jesus)  that  bare  thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou 


115 

liast  sucked  :  but  he  said,  Yea,  rather  blessed  are 
they  that   hear  the  word  of  God,  and    keep  it." 
John,  ch.  XV.  "  If  ye  keep  my  commandments, 
ye  shall  abide  in  my  love  :  even  as  I  have  kept  my 
Father's  commandments,  and  abide  in  his  love." 
What,  then,  are  those  swings,  the  obedience  to 
which  is  so  absolutely  commanded  as  indispensa- 
ble and  all-sufficient  to  those  who  desire  to  inherit 
eternal  life  ?     Tliey  are  no  other  than  the  blessed 
and  benign  moral  doctrines  taught  in  the  serraon 
on  the  mount,  (contained  in  the  5th,  6th,  and  7th 
chapters  of   Matthew,)   which    include   therefore 
every  duty  of  man,  and  all  that  is  necessary  to  sal- 
vation ;  and  they  expressly  exclude  mere  profes- 
sion or  belici,   from  tliose  circumstances  which 
God  graciously  admits  as  giving  a  title  to  eternal 
happiness.     Neither  in  this,  nor  in  any  other  part 
of  the  New  Testament,  can  we  find  a  command- 
mjnt  similarly  enjoining  a  knowledge  of  any  of 
the  mysteries  or  historical  relations  contained  in 
those  books.     It  is  besides  plainly  stated,  that  but 
a  very  small  portion  of  tii  •  wM)rks  of  .lesus  have 
been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  Evangelists.   John 
says,  at  the  conclusion  of  his  gospel,  ch.  xxi.  ver. 
25.  "  There  are   also  m;iny   other  things   which 
Jesus  did,   the   which  if  they  should   be   wriiien 
every  one,  I  suppose  th(?  world  itself  could  not 
contain  the  books  that  sh.uld   be  written."     On 
the  other  hand,  we  cannot  doubt   that  the  whole 
spirit  of  his  doctrines  has  been  faithfully  and  fiilly 
recorded.     The  reason  of  this  appears  obvious  : 


V 


§ 


f  !> 


.n 


110 

—miracles  must  have  had  a  powerful  eflect  on 
the  minds  of  those  who  witnessed  them,  and  who, 
without  some  such  evidence,    were  disposed  to 
question    the    authority  of  the    teacher   of  those 
doctrines.     John,  ch.  xv.  ver.  23  :   "  The  works 
that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear  witness 
of  me."  Ver   37  and  38  :  '*  If  I  do  not  the  works 
of    my   Father,    believe   me    not.     But  if  I   do, 
thoutrh    ye   believe   not  me,  believe   the  w(>rks." 
Had'' his  doctrines  of  themselves   made  their  due 
impressions,    the  aid  of  miracles  would  not  have 
been  requisite,  nor  had  recourse  to.     In  this  coun- 
try, the  bare  report  of  such  miracles  could  have 
given  no  support  to  the  weight  of  the  doctrmes  ; 
for,  as  the  Compiler  has  stated  in  his  Introduc- 
tion, miracles  infinitely  more  wonderful  are  related 
of  their  gods  and   saints,   on  authorities  that  the 
Hindoos  must  deem  superior  to  those  of  the  Apos- 
tles. 

We  are  tauj^ht  by  revelation,  as  well  as  educa- 
tion,   to  ascribe    to  the    Deity,   the  perfecth)?!   of 
those    nttribules    which    ^ire    este^MUnd   cxceUent 
amonusi  mankind.      \nd  accordincr  to  iliose  idt-as 
it   must  surt  ly  appear  morp   consistent  wilh   tlie 
justice  of  the  t^ovrreion  \li\Wi\  that  he  sh(»ulil  ad- 
jnit  to  mercy  those  of  his  subjects  who,  ac  know- 
led^ring  his   authority,  have   eiide.ivoured  to  obey 
his    laws  ;  or  sliown  contrition,  when    lh(7    have 
fallen  short  of  their  (hsty   and  love  ;  than  that  he 
shiudd  select  for  faviuir  those   whose   claims  rest 
on  having  acquired  particular  ideas  of  his  nature, 


117 

and  of  the  origin  of  his  Son,  and  of  what  afflic- 
tions that  Son  may  have  suffered  in  behalf  of  his 
people.  If  the  Reviewer  and  Editor  will  conti- 
nue to  resist  both  authority  and  common  sense,  I 
must  be  content  to  take  leave  of  them  with  the 
following  words,  {Luke,  ch.  xviii.)  "  And  he 
said  unto  him.  If  they  hear  Moses  and  the  Pro- 
phets, neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though  one 
rose  from  the  dead." 

5.  The  Reviewer  observes,  (in  page 24.)  w^ith 
every  mark  of  disappnibation,  that  the  Compiler 
has  intimated  in  the  Introduction,  that  the  dog- 
matical and  historical  matters  are  rather  calculated 
to  do  injury.  The  Compiler  could  not  certainly 
overlook  the  daily  occurrences  and  obvious  facts 
which  led  him  to  remark,  [in  the  Introduction,] 
thai  "  historical  and  some  other  passages  are  lia- 
ble to  the  doubts  and  disputes  of  FVeethinkers  and 
A nti -christians,  especially  miraculous  relations, 
which  are  much  less  wonderfnl  than  the  fabricated 
talt\<  hauled  down  to  the  natives  of  Asia  :"  and 
to  pr<»vc  wliMt  (he  Compiler  stated,  I  Inunbly  en- 
treat  any  one  to  refer  to  the  numerous  volumes 
written  by  persons  unattached  to  any  of  the  esta- 
blished churches  against  the  miracHes,  the  history, 
and  some  of  the  dogmas  of  Christianity.  It  has 
been  the  dilierent  interpret?Jtions  of  the  dogmas 
that  have  given  rise  to  such  keen  dis[)utes  amongst 
the  followers  of  Jesus.  They  have  not  only  de- 
stroyed harmony  and  union  between  one  sect  of 
Christians  and  another,   and  continue  to  do  so  : 


I  ;1 


A 


t  (4- 


!^f 


1/ 


but  in  past  times  have  even  caused  continual  wars 
and   frequent  bloods  bed  to  rage  amongst   them, 
more  dreadfully  than  between  Christians  and  infi- 
dels. A  slight  reference  to  the  histories  of  Chris- 
tian countries  will,  1  trust,  aflbrd  to  my  readers 
entire   conviction  upon  this  head.     Besides,  the 
Compiler,  residing  in  the  same   spot  where  Euro- 
pean missionary  gentlemen  and  others  for  a  period 
of  upwards  of  twcaity  years   have   been,  with  a 
view  to  promote  Christianity,  distributing  in  vain 
amoncjst    the  natives    numberless  copies   of  the 
complete    Bible,  written   i[i    different  languages, 
could     not      be     altogether     ignorant     of    the 
causes   of  their    disappointment.     He,    however, 
nevrr  doubted  their  zeal  for  the   promulgation  of 
Christianity,  nor  the  accuracy  of  their  statement 
with  regard  to  immense  sums  of  money  being  an- 
nually expended  in   preparing  vast    numbers  of 
copies  of  the  Scriptures  ;  but  he  hos  seen  with 
reo-ret,  that  they    have  completely   counteracted 
their  own  b(mevc)lent  efforts,  by   introducing    all 
the  dogmas  and    mysteries   taught   in   Christian 
Churches  to  people  by  no  means  prepared   to  re- 
ceive them  ;  and  that  they  have  been  so  incautious 
and  inconsiderate  in  their  attempts  to  enlighten  the 
natives  of  India,  as  to  address  their  instructions  to 
them   in  the  same  way  as  if  they  were   reasoning 
with  persons  brought  up  in  a  Christian  country, 
with  those  dogmatical  notions  imbibed  from  their 
infancy.     The    consequtmce    has  been,    that  the 
natives  in  general,  instead  of  benefiting  by  the 


119 

perusal  of  the  Bible,  copies  of  which  they  always 
receive  gratuitously,  exchange  them  very  often  for 
blank  paper  ;  and  generally   use  several  of  the 
dogmatical  terms  in  their  native  language  as  a 
mark  of  slight  in  an  irreverent  manner;  the  men- 
tion of  which  is  repugnant  to  my  feelings.     Sabat, 
an    eminently  learned   but   grossly   unprincipled 
Arab,  whom  our  divines  supposed  that  they   had 
converted    to  Christianity,    and    whom     they  of 
course  instructed  in  all  the  dogmas  and  doctrines, 
wrote  a  few  years  ago  a  treatise  in  Arabic  against 
those  very  dogmas,  and  printed  himself  and  pub- 
lished several  hundred  copies  of  this  work.     And 
another    Moosulman,    of    the    name    of    Ena'et 
Ahmud,  a  man  of  respectable  family,   who  is  still 
alive,  and  speedily  returned  to  Mohununudanism 
from  Christianity,  pleading  that  he  had  not  been 
able  to  reconcile  to  his  understanding  certain  dog- 
mas which   were  in^parted  to  him.     It  has  been 
owing  to  their  beginning  with  the  introduction  of 
mysterious  dofirmas,  and  of  relations   that  at  first 
sightappear  incredible, that,  notwithstanding  every 
exertion    on  the   part   of  our  divines,    I  am  not 
aware    that    we   can    find    a    single    respectable 
Moosulman  or  Hindoo,  who  were  not  in  want  of 
the  common  comforts  of  life,  once   glorified  with 
the  truth  of  Christianity,  constantly   adhering  to 
it.      Of    the   few    hundred     natives    who    have 
been    nominally  converted  to  Christianity,    and 
who    have    been    generally   of  the    most   igno- 
rant  class,  there  is  ground    to  suspect  that  the 


li 


K 


\ 


120 

greater  number  have  been  allured  to  change  their 
faith  by  other  attractions  than  by  a  convi.  tion  of 
the  truth  and  reasonableness  of  those  dogmas  ;  as 
we  find  nearly  all  of  ihem  areemjiloycd  or  fed  by 
their  spiritual  teachers,  and  in  case  of  neglect  are 
apt  to  manifest  a  reb.llious  spirit  ;— a  circum- 
stance which  is  well  known  to  the  Compiler  from 
several  local  facts,  as  well  as  from  the  following 
occurrence.     About  three  years  ago,   the  Compi- 
ler, on  his  visit  to  an  English  gentleman,  who  is 
still  residing  in  the  vicinity  of  Calcutta,  saw  a  great 
number  of   Christian   converts   with    a  petition, 
which  they    inten.led  to  present  to  the  highest 
ecclesiastical  authority,  stating,  that  their  teachers, 
through  false  promises  of  advancement,   ''»»•  in- 
ducer them  to  give  up  their  ancient  religion.  The 
Compiler  felt  indignant  at  their  presumption,  and 
suggested  to  the  gentlemen,  as  a  friend,  the  pro- 
priety of  not  countenancing  a  set  of  men  who, 
from  their  own   declaration,  seemed  so  unprinci- 
pled     The  Missionaries  themselves  are  as  well 
aware  as  the  Compiler,  that  those  very  .logmas  are 
the  points  which  the  people  always  select  as  the 
most  proper  for  attack,    both   in  their  oral   and 
written  controversies  with  Christian  teachers  ;  all 
of  which,  if  required,  the  Compiler  is  prepared 
to  prove  by  the  most  unquestionable  testimony. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  Compiler  pub- 
lished such  sayings  of  Christ,  as  he  thought  intel- 
ligible to  all,  conveying  conviction  with  them,  and 
best  calculated  to  lead  mankind  to  universal  love 


\li 


, 


121 

an  J  harmony  ;  not  dwelling  upon    those  matters, 
an  observance  of  which  is  not  absohitely  ordain- 
ed, and   the  interpretations  of  which,   instead  of 
introducing  peace  and  happiness,    have  generally 
given    rise  to  disputes   and    controversies.     The 
Compiler  had  no  local  influence  nor  power  to  pro- 
mote any  one's  interest,  nor  has  he  situations  to 
give  away,  nor  yet  has  he  friends  and  coHeaaues 
to  recommend  others  to  their  patronage.     Hum- 
ble as  he  is,   he  has  therefore  adopted  those  mea- 
sures which  he  thought  most  judicious,  to  spread 
the   truth  in  an    acceptable    manner  ;  but    I   am 
sorry  to  observe,  that  he  has  unfortunately  and  un- 
expectedly met  with  opposition  from  those  whom 
he  considered  the   last  persons  likely  to  oppose 
him  on  this  subject.    From  what  has  already  been 
advanced,  the  Reviewer  may  perceive  the  reason 
why  the  passages  extracted  by  the  Compiler  from 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John  should  be   comparatively 
few.     Ii  is  from  this  source  that  the  most  diflScult 
to  be  comprehended  of  the  dogmas  of  the  (liris- 
tian   religion    have  been   principally  drawn  :  and 
on  the  foundation  of  passages  of  that  writer,  the 
interpretation  of  which  is  still  a  matter  of  keen 
discussion  amongst  the   most  learned   and   most 
pious   scholars    in   Christendom,   is   erect(?d    the 
mysterious  doctrine   of  three  Gods  in  one  God- 
head, the   origin   of    Mohummudanism,  and  the 
stumbling-block  to  the  conversion  of  the  more  en- 
lightened amongst  the  Hindoos. 

To   impress  more   strongly  on   the   minds   of 
those  for  whom  this  compilation  was  intended,  *he 

19 


II 


r1k 


t- 


I 


doctrines  tausriit  by  Jesus,  the  Compiler  thought 
the  varied  repetition  of  them  by  different  but  con- 
curring reporters  highly  advantageous,  as  show- 
ing, clearly,  that  those  doctrines  were  neither 
misrepresented  nor  misconceived  by  any  of  those 

Evangelists. 

6    Nor   is  the  conduct  of  the  Compiler  m  se- 
lecting certain  passages  of  the  Scriptures  forcer- 
tain  purposes  singular ;  for  we  see  very  often  ex- 
tracts from  the  Bible,   published  by  the  learned 
men  of  every  sect  of  Christians,  with  a  view  to  the 
maintenance    of  particular  doctrines,     ^'"stian 
Churches  have  selected  passages  from  the  Bible, 
whi.h  they  conceive   particularly  excellent,  and 
well  adapted  for  the  constant  perusal  and  study 
of  the  people  of  their  respective  churches  ;  and 
besides,    it    is   the    continual    practice  of  every 
Christian  tea<her  to  choose  from  the  whole  Scrip- 
tures such  texts  as  he  deems  most  important,  for 
the  purposes  of  illustrating  them,  and  impressing 
them  on  the  minds  of  his  hearers.     Nor  will  those 
teachers,   if  questioned  as  to  their  object  in  such 
selection,  h.-sitate    to  assign  as  their  motive  the 
very  reason  adopted  by  the  Compiler  as  his— the 
superior    importance  of  the    parts    so   selected. 
Whether  or  not  he  has  erred  in  his  judgment  on 
that  point,  must  be  determined  by  those  who  will 
candi.lly  peruse  and   consider  the  arguments  al- 
ready advanced  on  tiie  subject,  always  bearing  in 
mind  the  lesson  practically  taught  by  the  Saviour 
himselfof  adaptinghis  instructions  to  the  suscepti- 
bility and  capacity  of  his  hearers.     John  xvi.  12  : 


1 


'2r^ 


"  I  have  yet  many  things  to  say   unto  you,  but  ye 
cannot  bear  them  now." 

Hindostan  is  a  country,  of  which  nearly  3-5ths 
of    the     inhabitants    are    Hindoos,    and    2-.5ths 
Moosulmans.     Although  the  professors  of  neither 
of  these  religions  are  possessed  of  such  accom- 
plishments as  are  enjoyed  by  Europeans  in  gene- 
ral, yet   the  latter  portion  are  well   known  to  be 
firmly  devoted  to  a  belief  in  one  God,  which   has 
been  instilled  into  their  minds  from  their  infancy. 
The  former  (I  mean  the  Hindoos)  are,  with  a  few 
exceptions,   immersed    in  gross  idolatry,  and  in 
belief  of  the  most   extravagant   descriptions  re- 
specting  futurity,    antiquity,    and  the  miracles  of 
their  deities  and  saints,   as  handed  down  to  tliem 
and  recorded  in  their  ancient  books.     VVei'jhinsr 
these  circumstances,  and  anxious,  from  his  long 
experience  of  religious  controversy  with  n.Miives, 
to  avoid  further  disputation  with  them,  the  Com- 
piler selected  those  precepts  of  Jesus,  the    obe- 
dience to  which  he  believed  most    peculiarly   re- 
quired of  a  Christian,  and   such  as  could   by  no 
means    tend,  in  doctrine,  to  excite  the  religious 
horror  of  Mohummedans,  or  the  scoffs  of  Hindoos. 
What  benefit  or  peace  of    mind  can    we  bestow 
upon  a  Moosulman,  who  is  an  entire  stranger  to  the 
Christian  world,  by  communicating  to  him   with- 
out preparatory  instruction  all  the  peculiar  dogmas 
of  Christianity  :  such  as   those  contained  in  v€7\ 
1st,  chap.    J  St,  of  St.  John,  "  In  the  beginning 
was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and 
the  Word  was  God  ?"  Would  thev  not  find  them- 


1 


1-4 


\ 


IJ4 

selves  at    a  lo.^s  to   reconcile  this  dogma  to  thcMr 
unprepared  understandings,  viz.  A.  is  B.,  and  A. 
is    also    with    B.  ?    Aliluujih  the  interpretations 
criven  us  of  such  texts  by  truly  learn<;(l  and  candid 
divines  be  ever  so  satisfactory,   yet,  to  those  that 
are    strangers  to  th(;se  explanations,  they  cannot 
be   intelligible  ;  nor  can  it  be   ex]>ected  from  the 
order    of  ilm»gs,   that  ea<h  can    happily  find    at 
hand  an  able  interpreter,  to  whom  he  can  have  re- 
course  for   an   explanation,  whenever  he  may  be 
involved  in  ditriculties  or  doubts.     But  as  a  great 
number  of  Missionary   gentlemen    may   perhaps 
view  the  matter  in  a  dilVerent  light,  and  join  the 
Editor   of  the   Friend   of  India,  in  accusing    the 
Compiler  as  an  injurer  of  the  cause  of  truth,    I 
doubt  not  that  with  a  view  to  avoid  every  possibi- 
lity  of  such  im|)Utation,  and  to  prevent    others 
from    attributing  their  ill  success  to   his  interfe- 
rence with   their  duties,  he  would  gladly  abstain 
from   publishing  again  on  the  same  subject,  if  he 
could  see  in  past  experience  any  thing  to  justify 
hopes  of  their  success.     From    what  1   have  al- 
ready stated,  I   hope  no  one  will  infer  that  1  feel 
ill-disposed    towards     the    Missionary    establish- 
ments in  this  country.    This  is  far  from  being  the 
case.   I  pray  tor  their  augmentation,  and  that  their 
members  may  remain  in  the  hap|)y  (Mijoyment  ot 
life  iu  a  dim  iteso  gentrrally  immieal  to  LLuropean 
consinulions  ;   i'or  in  propoiiioit  lu  the  increase  of 
their  numbers,  sobriety,  mode'ratiou,  temperance, 
and  good   behaviour,  have  been    dilVused   among 
their  neighbours  as  the  necessary  consequences  of 
their  company,  conversation,  and  good  example. 


*^^gijn 


J  2r> 

[7.]  The  Reviewer  charges  the  Compiler  with 
inconsistency,  (p.  27.)  because  he  has  termed  the 
precepts  collected  by  him,  a  code  of  religion  and 
morality,  while,  as  the  Keviewersupjmses,  they  form 
only  a  code  of  morality  atid  not  of  relio-ion.  It  is 
already  explained  in  paragrai>h  2d,  that  the  Com- 
piler has  introdu((>(l  thost^  precepts  of  J(»sus  under 
the  denomination  of  tht?  moral  savincrg  of  the 
NewTestam(;nt,  taking  the  word  moral  in  its  wide 
sense,  as  including  our  conduct  to  Cod,  to  each 
other,  and  to  (uirselves  ;  and  to  avoid  the  least 
possibility  of  misunderstanding  the  term,  he  has 
carefully  particularized  the  sense  in  which  he  ac- 
cepted that  word  by  thci  latter  sentence,  "  This 
simple  code  of  Religion  and  Morality,  (meaning 
by  the  former,  those  precepts  which  treat  of  our 
duty  to  God,  and  by  the  latter,  such  as  relate  to 
our  duties  to  mankind  and  to  ourselves,)  is  so 
admirably  calculated  to  elevate?  men's  ideas  to 
high  and  liberal  notions  of  one  God,"  &c.  "  and  is 
also  so  well  fitted  to  regulate  the  conduct  of  the 
human  race  in  the?  discharge  of  their  various  du- 
ties to  God,  to  th(;ms(dves,  and  to  society,"  «Slc. 
In  conformity  to  the  dcjsign  thus  expressed,  he  has 
collected  all  the  sayinj^s  that  have  a  ten<lency  to 
those  ends.  TIm»  Coiupiler,  however,  observes 
with  regn^t,  that  neither  this  l.iuguagtj  nor  this 
fact,  has  aflordt;d  to  tin;  Reviewer  satisfactory 
evidence  of  his  iiiiention,  nor  stifliced  to  save  him 
from  the  unexpected  imputation  of  inconsistency. 

The  Reviewer  again  (pfige  29.)  charges  the 
Compiler  with  inconsistency,    in  having  introdu 


ij 


I 


if 


\ 


12G 

ced  some  doctrinal  passages  into  his  compilation. 
In  reply  to  which,  I  again  entreat  the  attention  of 
the  respected  Reviewer  to  that  passage  in  the  In- 
troduction, in  which  the   Cc^mpiler  stales  the  mo- 
tives that  have  led  him  to  exclude  certain  parts  of 
the  gospels  from  his  publication.     He  there  states, 
that^'it  is  on  account  of  these  passages  being  such 
as  were  the  ordinary  foundation  of  the  arguments 
of  the  opponents  of  Christianity,  or  the  sources  of 
the  interminable  controversiis  tint    h  i/e    led  to 
heart-burnings     and   even     bloodshed     amongst 
Christians,    that  they  were  not  includfd  m  his  se- 
lection ;  and  they  were   omitted  the    more   rea- 
dily, as  he  considered  them   not  essential  to  reli- 
gion.    But  such  dogmas,  or  doctrinal  and  other 
passages,  as  are  not  exposed  to  these   objections, 
and   are  not  unfamiliar  to  the  minds  of  those  for 
whose   benefit  the  compilation  was  intended,  are 
generally  included,  in  conformity  with  tlu^  avowed 
plan  of  the  work— particularly  such  as  i^eem  cal- 
culated  to  direct    our  love  and  obedience  to  the 
beneficent    Author  of  the  universe,    and  to    him 
whom  he  graciously  sent  to  deliver  those  Precepts 
of  Religion    and  iMorality,  whose   tendency  is  to 
promote  universal  peace  and  harmony. 

8.  In  objecting  to  the  assertion  made  by  the 
Compiler  in  the  Introduction  as  to  a  belief  in  the 
existence  of  God  prevailing  generally,  the  respect- 
ed Reviewer  advances  three  arguments  :— 1st, 
That  millions  of  people  believe  in  a  plurality  of 
Gods.  2dly,  That  the  majority  of  those  enlighten- 
ed persons  who  deny  the  truth  of  the   Jewish 


; 


127 

and  Christian  Revelation  are  Atheists.  tJdly,  That 
the  very  system  of  the  Vedant,  which  denies  to 
God  his  moral  attributes,  is  a  refined  and  disgui- 
sed Atheism.     I  certainly  admit  that  a  great  num- 
ber of  men,  and  even   men  of  profound  learning 
and  extensive  abilities,  are,  owing  to  their  early 
education,  literally  sunk  in  Polytheism,  an  absurd 
and  irrational  system  of  religion.    But  the  admis- 
sion of  a  plurality  of  Gods  does  not  amount  to  the 
denial  of  Godhead.      A  man,  for  instance,  cannot 
be  accused  of  having  no  notion  of  mankind,  be- 
cause he  is  proved  to  believe  in  the  existence  of  a 
plurality    of  indivi  *uals.      The    Reviewer    ought 
therefore,  to  have  confined  himself  to  the  remark, 
the  truth   of  which  will  be  readily  admitted,   that 
there  are  millionsof  people  ignorant  of  the  Unity 
of  God ;  the  only  doctrine  consistent  with  reason  and 
revelation.  The  astonishing  eagerness  of  the  learn- 
ed amongst  those  whose  practice  and  language  are 
polytheistical,  to  prefer  their  claim  to  be  considered 
as  Monotheists,  is  a  strong  evidence  of  the  consis- 
tency of  the  system  of   Monotheism  with   reason. 
Debased  and  despicable  as   is  the   belief  of  the 
Hindoos  in  three   hundred  and  thirty  millions  of 
gods,  they  pretend   to  reconcile    this  persuasion 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  God;  alleging 
that  the  three  hundred  and  thirty  millions  of  gods, 
whom  they  enumerate,    are  subordinate  agents, 
assuming  various  offices  in  preserving  the  harmo- 
ny of  the  universe  under  one  Godhead,  as  innu- 
merable rays  issue  from  one  sun.     I  am  at  a  loss 
to  trace  the  origin  of  this  second  argument,  impu- 


^!.| 


\ 


128 

ting  Atheism  to  the  majority  of  those  who  deny 
the  divinity  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Revela- 
tion.    For,  notwithstanding  my  acquaintance  with 
several   Europeans  and    Asiatics  who  doubt  the 
possibility  of  Revelation,   I  have  never  met  with 
one,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,   maintaining 
Atheism,  however  wid.ly  they  might  differ  from 
the   Reviewer  and  the  Compiler  in  a  great  many 
points  of  belief  relating  to  the  Deity.     The  Re- 
viewer, perhaps,    may  have  met  with  some   un- 
happy Freethiiik.rs,  who   have  professed  doubts 
respecting  tl>e  existence  of  a  supreme   superin- 
tending power—a  circumstance  which  has  proba- 
bly induced  him  to  form  ihis  opinion  ;  but  such 
rare  instances  can  have  no  force  to  set  aside  the 
credit  of  what  the  Compiler  affirms,  that  a  belief 
in  God   pretaih  fitveraUy.     Neither  can  1   con- 
scientiously coincide  with  the  respected  Reviewer 
in  his  imputing   Atheism  to   the  Vedant  system, 
under  the  supposition  of  its  denying   moral  attri- 
butes to  God  ;  nor  can  I  h.lp  lamenting  that  re- 
ligious prejudice  should    influence  the   Reviewer 
so  much,    as   to   make    him  apply  the    term    of 
Atheist  towards  a  s.'ct  or  to  individuals  who  look 
up   to  the  God  of  nature  through    his  wonderful 
works  alone  ;  for  the  Vedant,  in  common  with  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  Scriptures,  fr*>m  thi-  impos- 
sibility of  forming  more  exalted  conceptions,  con- 
stantly  ascribes  to  God  the    perfection  of  those 
moral  attributes  which  are  consider,  d  among  the 
human  species  excellent  and  sublime.     To  prove 
this,  I  quote  one  passage  from  each  of  the  four 


V 


129 


Oopuiiishuds  of  the  Vedant,  which  have  already 
been  translated  into  English.  Moonduk,  eh.  1. 
sect  I  :  "By  him  who  knows  all  things  collec- 
tively and  distinctly,  whose  knowledge  and  will  are 
the  only  means  of  his  actions,  Bruhma,  name, 
and  form,  and  all  that  vegetates,  are  produced." 
Kuthu,  ch.  5 :  "  God  is  eternal,  among  all  the 
perishable  universe  :  and  is  the  source  of  sensa- 
tion among  all  animate  existences ;  and  he  alone 
assigns  to  so  many  objects  their  respective  pur- 
poses," Kenopunishud  :  "  In  a  battle  between 
the  celestial  gods,  and  the  demons,  God  enabled 
the  former  to  defeat  the  latter."  And  Ishopuni- 
shud  :  "  He  overspreads  all  creatures,  is  merely 
spirit  without  the  form  either  of  a  minute  body  or 
of  an  extended  one,  which  is  liable  to  impression 
or  organization.  He  is  pure,  perfect,  omniscient, 
the  Ruler  of  the  intellect,  omnipresent,  and  the 
self-existent.  He  has  from  eternity  been  assign- 
ing to  all  creatures  their  respective  purposes."  For 
further  evidence,  if  required,  I  beg  to  refer  the  Re- 
viewer to  the  rest  of  the  original  Vedant  works 
that  may  be  found  in  the  College  Library  and  in 
the  Missionary  stores  of  books.  It  is,  however, 
very  true,  that  the  Vedant  declares  very  often  its 
total  ignorance  of  the  real  nature  and  attributes 
of  God.  Kenopunishud,  ver.  3  :  "  Hence  no  vi- 
sion can  approach  him,  no  language  can  describe 
him,  no  intellectual  power  can  compass  or  deter- 
mine him  ;  we  know  nothing  how  the  Supreme 
Being  should  bo  explained,"  &c.     It  also  rcpre- 

20 


M. 


mms'- 


\ 


128 

ling  Atheism  to  the  majority  of  those   who  deny 
the  divinity  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Revela- 
tion.    For,  notwithstanding  my  acquaintance  with 
several   Europeans  and   Asiatics  who  doubt  the 
possibility   of  Revelation,    I   have  never  met  with 
one,  to  the  best  of  my  recoUecticni,   mnintainmg 
Atheism,  however  widrly  they  might  differ  from 
the   Reviewer   and  the  Compiler  in  a  great  many 
points  of  belief  relatinii  to  the  Drity.     The  Re- 
viewer,  perhaps,    may  have   met  with  some   un- 
happy Freethinkers,   who   have  professed  doubts 
respecting  the  existence  of  a  supreme    superin- 
tending power— a  circumstance  which  has  proba- 
bly induced   him  to  form  this  opinion  ;  but  such 
rare  instances  can  have  no  force  to  set  aside  the 
credit  of  what  the  Compiler  affirms,   that  a  belief 
in  God   pretaiis  ^evcraUy^     Nciliier  can  1   con- 
scientiously coincide  with  the  respected  Reviewer 
in  his   imputing   Atheism  to   the  Ved nut  system, 
under  the  supposition  of  its  denying   moral  attri- 
butes to  God  ;  nor  can  I  hrlp  lamenting  that  re- 
ligious prejudice  should    influence  thc^   Reviewer 
so  much,    as   to   make    him  apply   the    term    ot 
Atheist  towards  a  sect  or  to  individmds  who  look 
up   to  the  God  of  nature  through    his  wonderful 
works  alone  ;  for  the  Vedant,  in  common  with  the 
Jewish  and  (^hristian  Scri[)tures,  from  thc^  impos- 
sibility of  forming  more  exalted  conceptions,  con- 
stantly   ascribes  to  God  the    perfection  of  those 
moral  attributes  which  are  consich-r.  d  amoncr  the 
human  species  excellent  and  sublime.     To  prove 
this,  I  quote  one  passage  from  each  of  the  four 


\ 


129 


Oopunishuds  of  the  Vedant,  which  have  already 
been  translated  into  English.  Moonduk,  ch.  1. 
sect  I  :  "  By  him  who  knows  all  things  collec- 
tively and  distinctly,  whose  knowledge  and  will  are 
the  only  means  of  his  actions,  Bruhma,  name, 
and  form,  and  all  that  vegetates,  are  produced." 
Kuthu,  ch.  5  :  "  God  is  eternal,  among  all  the 
perishable  universe  :  and  is  the  source  of  sensa- 
tion among  all  animate  existences ;  and  he  alone 
assigns  to  so  many  objects  their  respective  pur- 
poses," Kenopunishud  :  "  In  a  battle  between 
the  celestial  gods,  and  the  demons,  God  enabled 
the  former  to  defeat  the  latter."  And  Ishopuni- 
shud  :  "  He  overspreads  all  creatures,  is  merely 
spirit  without  the  form  either  of  a  minute  body  or 
of  an  extended  one,  which  is  liable  to  impression 
or  organization.  He  is  pure,  perfect,  omniscient, 
the  Ruler  of  the  intellect,  omnipresent,  and  the 
self-existent.  He  has  from  eternity  been  assign- 
ing to  all  creatures  their  respective  purposes."  For 
further  evidence,  if  required,  I  beg  to  refer  the  Re- 
viewer to  the  rest  of  the  original  Vedant  works 
that  may  be  found  in  the  College  Library  and  in 
the  Missionary  stores  of  books.  It  is,  however, 
very  true,  that  the  Vedant  declares  very  often  its 
total  ignorance  of  the  real  nature  and  attributes 
of  God.  Kenopunishud,  ver.  3  :  "  Hence  no  vi- 
sion can  approach  him,  no  language  can  describe 
iiim,  no  intellectual  power  can  compass  or  deter- 
mine liim  ;  we  know  nothing  how  the  Supreme 
Bering  shoidd  be  explained,"  &c.     It  also  rcpre- 

20 


1, 


ll 


♦li 


1;3U 

sents  God  sometimes  in  a  manner  lamiliar  to  the 
understanding  of  the  vulgar.     Moonduk,    ch.  7, 
sect.  1  :  "  Heaven  is  the  head,  and  the  sun  and  the 
moon  are  his  eyes  ;  space  is  his  ears,"  &c.      But 
such  declarations  are  not   peculiar  to  the  Vedant 
doctrines,  as  these  are  found  frequently  in  the  sa- 
cred Scriptures.     Job  xxxvi.  26  :  "  Behold    God 
is  great,  and   we  know  him  not;"  "touching  the 
Almighty  we  cannot  find  him  out;  his  greatness 
is  unsearchable."     The  Scriptures  also  represent 
God  in  the  same  familiar  and  figurative  manner  as 
is  found  in   the  Vedant.     God  is  affirmed  to  have 
made  man  in   his  own  image,   after  his  own  like- 
ness.    The  angels   always  behold    God's  face  in 
heaven.     In  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  in  the 
New,   God    IS  represented    as   repenting   of   his 
works,  as  being  moved  with  anger,  vexation,  grief, 
joy,  love,  and  hate  :  as  moving  from  place  to  place  ; 
having  arms,  with  hands  and  fingers  ;  a  head,  with 
face,  mouth,  tongue,    eyes,   nose,  ears,   a  heart, 
bowels,  back,  thighs,  legs ;  as  seeing,  being  seen, 
speaking  and  hearing,    slumbering,  waking,  &c. 
No  one  capable  of  sound  reasoning  can  for  a  mo- 
ment imagine  that  these  or  any  other  descriptions 
of  God  are   intruded   to  convey  literal  notions  of 
the  unsearchable  incomprehensible  Being. 

May  God  render  religion  destructive  of  difler- 
ences  and  dislike  between  man  and  man,  and  con- 
ducive to  the  peace  and  union  of  mankind. — 
Amen. 


SECOND 


TO 


' 


THE    CHRISTIAN    PUBLIC, 


IN    DEFENCE    OP    THE 


'PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS.' 


\\ 


J, 


BY 


RAMMOIIUN    ROY. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION. 


"J 


■*!= 


BOSTON: 
Christian  Register  Office. 


1828. 


^^ 


v 


l! 


# 


li30 

sents  God  sometimes  in  a  manner  lamiliar  to  the 
understanding  of  the  vulgar.     Moonduk,    ch.  7, 
sect.  1  :  "  Heaven  is  the  head,  and  the  sun  and  the 
moon  are  his  eyes  ;  space  is  his  ears,"  &c.      But 
such  declarations  are  not   peculiar  to  the  Vedant 
doctrines,  as  these  are  found  frequently  in  the  sa- 
cred Scriptures.     Job  xxxvi.  26  :  "  Behold   God 
is  great,  and   we  know  him  not;"  "touching  the 
Almighty  we  cannot  find  him  out ;  his  greatness 
is  unsearchable."     The  Scriptures  also  represent 
God  in  the  same  familiar  and  figurative  manner  as 
is  found  in   the  Vedant.     God  is  aflSrmed  to  have 
made  man  in  his  own  image,  after  his  own  like- 
ness.    The  angels   always  behold    God's  face  in 
heaven.     In  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  in  the 
New,   God    IS  represented    as   repenting   of  his 
works,  as  being  moved  with  anger,  vexation,  grief, 
joy,  love,  and  hate  :  as  moving  from  place  to  place  ; 
having  arms,  with  hands  and  fingers  ;  a  head,  with 
face,  mouth,  tongue,    eyes,   nose,  ears,   a  heart, 
bowels,  back,  thighs,  legs;  as  seeing,  being  seen, 
speaking  and  hearing,   slumbering,  waking,  &c. 
No  one  capable  of  sound  reasoning  can  for  a  mo- 
ment imagine  that  these  or  any  other  descriptions 
of  God  are   intended   to  convey  literal  notions  of 
the  unsearchable  incomprehensible  Being. 

May  God  render  religion  destructive  of  difier- 
ences  and  dislike  between  man  and  man,  and  con- 
ducive to  the  peace  and  union  of  mankind. — 
Amen. 


APPEAL 


TO 


THE    CHRISTIAN    PUBLIC, 


; 


IN    DEFENCE    OF    THE 


^PRECEPTS  OF  JESUS.^ 


BY 


RAMMOIIUN    ROY. 


FROM  THE  LONDON  EDITION. 


*l 


BOSTON 


Christian  Register  Office. 


1828. 


1 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


4 


The  contents  of  the  following  Treatise  are  in- 
cluded under  these  two  propositions  :— 1st,  That 
the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  which  teach  that  love  to 
God  is  manifested  in  beneficence  towards  our  fel- 
low-creatures, are  a  sufficient  Guide  to  Peace  and 
Happiness;  and  2ndly,  That  that  omnipresent 
God,  who  is  the  only  proper  object  of  religious 
veneration,  is  one  and  undivided  in  person. 

Though  these  doctrines,  as  I  conceive  them  to 
be  alike  founded  on  reason  and  revelation,  appear 
to  me  to  be  almost  as  obvious  thruths  as  any  abstract 
axium,  yet  they  are  opposed  in  fact  by  a  very 
large  body  of  writers  and  teachers.  I  must  there- 
fore leave  them  to  be  decided  upon  by  those,  who 
will  be  pleased  to  bestow  their  candid  and  liberal 
attention  on  the  arguments  I  have  used  in  the 
succeeding  pages  ;— and  on  their  impartial  judg- 
ment I  confidently  rely. 


m.**  •L'-'.i-vtnfM'. 


:-<u:J"^ytVSaii^^  ■-aJWA 


^1 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


t 


CHAPTER  I. 

Alteration  of  Style  in  the  review,     -        -        .        .        145 
Two  points   which  the   Editor  wishes  to  establish,  to  wit, 
the  excellency  of  the  Dogmas  and  the  insufficiency  of  the 

^^''^'^''^ 145,146 

The  Compiler  acknowledges  the  first,  -        -        .        .         245 

Rejects  the  second, ,.-, 

Passages  showing  the  sufficiency  of  the  Precepts— God  one, 
and  the  object  of  supreme  love,         -         -         .         .      ' 
The  authority  of  Paul  quoted,  inapplicable,  - 
Justifying  a  selection  as  the  substitute  for  the  whole,      - 
The  Precepts  of  Jesus  practicable,         -         -         -         . 
The  contradiction  between  the  indispensableness  of  the  Doc- 
trines and  the  sufficiency  of  the  Precepts,  -         -         -  -      153 
Repentance  the  only  means  of  forgiveness,^  -        -        .         154 

CHAPTER  H. 


148 

150 

ib. 

151 


Positions  of  the  Reviewer,  --..._ 
Jesus  receives  all  power  from  God,  .... 
Power  given  to  Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  -  -  . 
The  unity  between  God  and  Jesus,  and  between  him  and  his 

disciples,        -----. 
God  dwelleth  in  Jesus  and  he  in  God,    -        -         .        . 
Jesus  considered  distinct  from  God 
He  that  hath  seen  the  Son  hath  seen  the  Father 
Definition  of  the  unify  between  God  and  Jesus 
Jesus's  disavowal  of  his  own  D(  ity 

The  Jews  charged  Jesus  only  with  calling  himself  the  Son  of 
God,     -        -        -         - 


155 
156 
157 

162 

163 

165 

ib. 

167 
ib. 

168 


r' 


."* 


I 


^1: 


ill 


I'l 


136 

Page. 

The  term  "  God"  frequently  applied  to  existences  inferior 

_  -  168 

to  God,    -  -  -  " 

The  term  "  for  ever"  often  applied  to  created  bemgs,  17" 

John  i.  I,  explained,  -  -  •  ' 

Hindoos  believe  in  one  Godhead,   consisting  of  numerous 

-  lT2 

persons  under  it,  - 

Jesus  performs  wonderful   works,  which  do  not  amount  to 
equality  with  those  of  God, 

4 

CHAPTER  HI. 

The  first  position  of  the  Editor,  on  the  ubiquity  of  Jesus,        173 

John  iii.  13,  explained,  -  -  "  " 

viii.  58,  xi.  8,    - 

xi.  38  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  2  ;  John  xiii.   6,  xvi.   32  ;  Matt. 

ii.  18,  15;  John  vi.  62,      -  -  -  ' 

xvi.  7.  5,  28,  xiii.  36,  .  -  - 

Matt,  xviii.  20,  explained,      -  -  •  " 

Luke  xvi   29,  -  "  '  '  ,        ... 

The  second  position  of  the  Editor,  on  the  incomprehensibi- 

lity  of  the  nature  of  Jesus,  •  -  - 

Matt.  xi.  27,  explained,        -  -  "  " 

John  xiv.  iG,  17,      - 

Mark  xiii.  32,  explained,        -             -             "  " 

Matt.  xi.  28,  [Prov  xxix.  17,]  explained,       - 

The  third  position  of  the  Editor,  on  Jesus  forgiving  sms  m 

an  independent  manner,     -             -             •  ' 

Mark  ii.  5, 9,  explained,        .             -            -  • 

Actsv.  31,32,  xiii.  38,          -             -             -  - 

Luke  xxiii.  34,  xi.  4  ;  Matt,  vi   14,   -             -  - 

The  fourth  position  of  the  Editor,  respecting  the  almighty 

power  of  Jesus,     -             -              -             -  ' 

Johnv.  21— 23,  explained,  -             -             -  " 

19—36         -             -             -             -  ■ 

Deut.  xviii.  15,18;  Acts  iii.  22,  vii.  37,  considered. 
Matt.  XX.  23,  xii.  28,  xxvi.  r.O,  considered,    - 


1*6. 
ib. 

176 

177 

179 

16. 

180 
ih. 

181 
ib. 

182 

t6. 
ib. 

183 

184 

ib. 
ih. 

i8:> 

187 


I 


137 

Matt.  X.  40 ;  John  v.  23,  separately  explained,      -" 
Matt.  V.  48,  .  '      f  > 

Matt.  iii.  9;  Luke  i.  37,     -  .  "  " 

From  this  the  Editor  infers  his  omniscience 
JVlark  xni.  32,  considered, 

John  v.  26,  27,  30,  considered,      -  "  *  " 

Daniel  ii.  46 ;  Matt,  xviii.  26,  considered, 

Johniv.24;  MatLiv.  IO,xix.  ir, 
ix.  31,  33,  38  ;   Mark  v.  7,   ' 

Luke  „ii.  15.16;  Matt.  xiv.  33,  xv.  25j  Mark'viii.  29^ 
L.uke  XXIV.  19,  .  _  ''^ ' 

John  vi.  69,  XX.  31  ;  Matt.  viii.  2,  '.  '  ' 

The  worship  paid  to  Jesus  inferior  to  divine  "        ,0,' 

Jesus  himself  worshipped  the  Father;  Matt.  vi.  9,  xxvi  J3 

John  xv..  26;   Luke  xxii.  41,  42;  Mark  xTv  35  3I' 

Luke  v..  12,  X.  21 ;  John  xi.  41  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  46;  ^ 

The  seventh  position  of  the  Editor,  respectin..  the  form  of 
Bapt,sm,  Matt.  x.xviii.  19;  Exod.  xiv  31,  "  ' 

Matt,  xxviii.  18,  considered, 

S>^o„ymous   expressions^  employed   by  Mohummud  and" 

Mussulmans,  notwithstanding,  remain  strict  Monotheists,  -" 


188 

189 
ib, 

ib. 

190 

ib. 

ib. 

191 

ib. 

192 

ib. 

-     193 


194 

195 

•195 


196 

197 

19s 
ib. 

199 
200 


CHAPTER  IV. 


Texts  adduced  in  support  of  the  atonement,  explained 
Uke,v.43,„.47~49;Johnxvii.8:       -       ^  '       ' 

The  sufferings  of  Jesus,  and  of  other  Prophets,  una'ccounta" 
hie,  except  as  prophesied,  .  .  "^^^^^n^a- 

21 


201 
202 

203 


;<^J 


H 


ii 


0 


II' 


sh 


J 


h 


j\ 


V 


138 

John  ix.  3;  Mark  xii.  1-9,  considered,    -  - 

, XV. -21,22,  -  -  "  '.    , 

Whether  Jesus  suffered  as  God  or  as  Man,  for  mankind,     • 
The  first  inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  God,         -  " 

The  last  inconsistent  with  justice,  -  *  jft 

Jesus  averse  to  the  death  of  the  cross,         -  '  ' 

Matthew  xxvi.  37,  39.  «,  .3;  Mark  xiv.  36,  cons.dered,  - 
Lutxxii.42,44;Joh„xii.2r-,xi.l7,l«5Ma«.«v.. 

53, 54,  considered,         -  "  '  "  . 

The  application  of  the  term  Saviour  to  Jesus  a  supposed 

nroof  of  the  atonement,  -  "  '      .       . 

Obadiah2l;   Nehemiah  ix.  27  ;  2  Kings  xin.  5  cons.dered, 
Jesus  is  a  Saviour  from  inculcating  the  word  ol  God, 
John  XV.  3,  V.  24.  vi.  63,  considered, 
God  declares  Christ  a  Prophet  equal  to  Moses,       - 

Matthew  V.  7.      - 

xxiii.  2, 3,  -  "  ' 

Jesus  was  a  perfect  teacher  of  the  divine  will,         - 

Matthew  V.  21, 22,  -  "  '  "  ] 

V.  27,  28,  ^1,  32,  38,  S9,  13-45,  considered, 

The  t.mi  "  l-im^  ^'f  <^'"^'  exphiined,      -  -  " 

Nature  ».r  Christ, 

God  -^hows  mercy  for  righteousness'  sake,  "    ..    .^' 

Genesis  XXX  27     Jerem.ah   xx^i^  18;  Genesis  xlvn,.  iG 

Kxoilns  xxiii  20,  il,  •  ' 

The  Author  otfers  no  opinion  on  this  doctrine 

CHAPTER  V. 

Disputes  ascribed  to  the   different    interpretations  of  the 

lUiberality  in  supposing  that  the  primitive  Chnst.ans  shed 

each  other's  blood  from  worldly  motives, 
Mosheim's  Authority,  Vol.  I.  pp.  419, 420,  -  " 

Illiberal  remarks  may  be  equally  applied  to  the  Apostles 

and  Martvrs,  -  "  '         ,  l  a 

The  cause  of  the  final  success  of  Alexandrians  (afterwards 
cmlled  the  Orthodox)  over  Arianf,  -  * 


rage 

204 

205 

ih. 

lb. 

206 


ib. 

207 

208 
ib. 

209 
ih, 
ib. 

ib. 
210 

ih. 

ib. 
211 
212 
213 

ib. 

■     214 
1*6. 


-     215 

216 
ib. 

217 
ib. 


139 


rage 


Violent  contentions  between  Roman  Catholics  and  Protestants,  21*8 
Matthew  X.  34,  explained  by  its  contents,        -  .  '219 

Difference  between  the  peculiar  Doctrines  of  the  Gospel  and 

the  tenet  of  the  existence  of  God,  -  .  221 

The  miracles  quoted  by  the  Reviewer  to  show  their  import- 
ance, considered,  -----  222 

Matthew  xi.  2 — 4,     -  -  .  ., 

to 

John  X.  37,  38,  xiv.  U  -,  Matthew  xii.  39 ;  John  xx.  29,  con- 
S'dered,     - ^23 

The  arguments  adduced  by  the  Reviewer  in  support  of  Chris- 
tian  miracles  are  equally  applicable  to  Hindoo  miracles,       224 

And  also  to  the  miraculous  narrations  0/  Mussulmans,  225 

Superior  excellence  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  -  226 


CHAPTER  VI. 

Only  one  circumstance  adduced  in  support  of  the  Deity  of 
the  Spirit  as  a  distinct  person         -  .  .  227 

The  association   of  the  name  of  the  Spirit  with  that  of  the 
Father  and  Son  inadequate  to  prove  this  doctrine,  -  228 

Prophets  associated  with  God.     2  Chron.  xx.  20  ,•  Jeremiah 
XXX.  9 ;  Lukeiii.  16,        .  .  .  _  ., 

The  Holy  Spirit  Hxplnined  to  be  the  guiding  influence  of  God 
John  xlv.  6,  xvi.  13,  -  .  ,  '229 

Anger,  mercy,  truth,  &c.  personified  as  well  as  the  Holy 
Spirit.  2  Kings  xxiv.  20  ;  Psalm  xc.  7,  xxi.  7,  vi.  4  • 
Luke  xii.  12;  Acts  i.  8  ;  John  xiv.  26;  Psalm  Ivii.  3! 
Ixxxv.  10,  c.  5,  xxxiii.  22,  xxxvi.  5,  cviii.  4 ;  [Ezek.J  vii' 
3;  2  Chron.  xxiv.  18,       -  -  .  .  '  ^ 

The  bad  consequences  of  supposing  the  Spirit  to  be  a  person 
of  God,  Matt.  i.  1 1 ,  20  ;  Luke  i.  3b, 

This  opmion  also  mconsisient  with  the  use  of  the  term  in 
Matt   iii.   11  ;  Luke  iii.  16;  Acts  x.  38;  Matt.  xii.  28 
31;  Lukeiv.  l,iii.  22,     -  -  .  .         ' 

The  Jews  accuse  Jesus  of  employing  diabolical  influence, 

Matt.  xii.  24,  37 j  with   context ;  and  Mark  iii.  29,  30,  ex- 
plained,   -  -  .  _ 


231 


232 
234 


:r' 


II 


ib. 


I. 


>\ 


140 


Page 


111 


242 

243 

.•6. 

244 


The  Spirit  of  <  iod  was  bestowed  before  the  coming  of  Jesus, 
'12  i.  .:.,  n,  67,  ii.  2.,  26  ;  Mark  x».  36  ;  Matt,  x..^^^^ 

43;  Lukeiv.  ''    "      ^     "  ,  .      '  '  .  'sSO 

Acts  V  3,  4  ;  John  xv.  26,  explained,  -  _ 

The  plural  number  of  nouns  and  pronouns  in  Hebrew,  &c.  .s 
often  used  lor  a  singular  agent  or  object,  f -en.  ..  -^  ' 
Ueul.  iv.  -1  ;   t^xod.  xxi.  4,  6  ,  Isaiah  vi.  8,  -4"     -  - 

The  same  rule  observed  in   Arabic  ;  of  which  an  example 

from  the  Qoran,  -  '      .     ."„       .^.i 

The  thrice  repeated  term  "  holy"  in  Isaiah  v..  3,  noticed. 
The  verse  which  has  been  introduced  as  John  v.  7,  noticed, 
The  Trin.ty  ,iot  taught  by  the  Apostles,         -  - 

This  proved   by  Acts  ii.   22,  32,  36,  iii.  22,  23,   -v.  12,  26 

27' V.  31,  7,   [vii..6,]  viii.37,   37,  X.   38,   42,  xm.^^8,  ^^^ 

Ex'trLs'from  Mosheim,  Vol.  I.  pp'  100,  411,412  414' 
showm,  that  so  late  as  the  year  3.4,  the  De.ty  of  the  bon 
was  not  considered  a  fundamental  article  ol  faith  247,  ~  J 

Reason  why   .  liuitariaus  prevailed  at  the  council  of  N-fe, 
Another  extract  from  Mosheim,  p.  20.     Acts  xxviu.  ^6,  and  ^^^ 

Ott'exnactrfrl  Mosheim",  showing  that  Polytheism  was 
familiar  to  the  Christian  converts  of  the  first  ages,  (pp. 

65,  66,;     -  "  "  '  ... 

The  prevalence  of  the  Tnnity  attributable  only  to  the  preju-    ^^^ 

dices  of  education,  -  "  '    ,.,    •   '  -        " 

The   alleged  twofold  consciousness  of  Jesus   Christ  const- 

dered,       -  -  - 

Moses  n.i;;ht  also  be  said  to  have  a  twofold  consciousness,  2o3 
Mode  of  reconrding  apparent  contradictions  in  Scripture,  .54 
Difficul.ies  arising  from  neglecting  this  mode,  -  »». 

The  argument  draw,  frcm  the  analogy  of  the  soul,  wdl  and 

nerreptioiiM  the  trinity,  considered,  -  -  -5,. 

The  argument  drawn  from  the  analogy  of  the  sun,  light,  and 

heat,  to  ihe  Trinity,  considered,  -  - 

On  the  argument  which  represents  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 

Spirit,  as  qualilies  of  one  Deity,    ---•»" 


F»ge 


The  union  between  Father  and  Son  compared  to  that  between 
the  human  soul  and  body, 

^Tr'"V"7'J'T  •''"^  '*"'^'''  resemblan'ce  between  the  ''^ 
term   «  Son  o<  Man"  and   «  Son  of  God,"  -  .  g'S 

On  the  argument  which  represents  God  as  a  compound  sub- 
Stance,      -  .  _  ^ 

John  xvii.  3  :   I  Cor.  xv.  24,  viii   6;  Ephes.i'v.  5,  6.  Quoted,  259 
Alleged  necessity  of  the   Deity  of  Jesus  .0  his  Ldiatorial 

character. 

7  -  •  ^  •» 

This  opposed  to  common  sense,  .  .  'j. 

Opposed  also  to  Scripture ;  Numbers  xi.  I,  2,  xvi  19  20 
«..7,  xxxii.  30;  Gen,  xviii.  32  ;  Jeremiah  xxvii. 'l 8  i 
Deuteronomy  v.  .5,  .  .  .  _     ^f^  261 

The  arguments  of  Hindoos  for   Polytheism   more  powerful' 
than  those  of  Christians  for  the  Trinity,     -  .  262 


APPENDIX. 

No.  1. 

Oh  the  Quotation  front  the  Old  Testament  contained  in  the 
Matt.  ii.  15. 


IV.  4,  - 


7,  - 


ix.  13,  - 

xix.  J9,xxii.  39, 

xxi.  42, 

xxii-  44, 

John  X.  35, 
Matt.  iv.  10, 

xiii.  14, 

xix.  5, 

18,19,      - 

xxii.  32, 

-37, 


•xxvi.  31,  - 


New. 

263 
264 

2*6, 

265 
ih, 
ib. 
ib, 
266 
266 
ib, 

267 
ib. 
ib. 
ib. 
ih. 


i 


■'  \, 


il 


i; 


Vj 


Page 
268 
25. 

269 

ib. 

ib. 

ib* 
270 

t6. 

ib. 


to 


271 


142 


John  vi.  45,  •  •            '            ' 

xiii.  18,  -  -            -            "            • 

XV.  25,  -  -            •            •            ^ 

Matt  xxi.  l6,  - 

„  13,  -  -            -            "            " 

XV.  7— 9,  -  - 

xi.  10,  -  -            -            "            ■ 

Luke  iv.  8,  - 

18,  19,         -  -  "  *        -    " 

These  quotations  prove  the  subordinate  nature  of  Jesus 

God,        ---•"' 

No.  II. 


On  the  References  made  to  the  Old  Testament  in  Support  of 

the  Deity  of  Jesus. 

John  i.  14,  compared  with  Isai^ih  ix.  6,  explained,       -  272 

Hebrews  i.  8, 9,  compared  with  Fsalm  xlv.  6,  J,  considered  284 
Luke  i.  16,  17,  compared  with  Isaiah  xl.  3,  and  Malach.  in.  1,  28. 
Johnxii.  41,  compared  with  Isaiah  VI.  5,        -  - 

1  Cor.  i.  30,  compared  with  Jeremiah  xxni.  G,  "  ^  *  * 
The  original  of  Jeremiah  xxiii.  6,  xxxiii.  l6  ;  Gen.  xxv.  26  ; 

2  Sam.  ii.  16  ;  Gen.  xvi.  14,  compared,      -  -     ^»7,  ^«o 

Rom.  xiv.  10,  12,  compared  with  Isaiah  xlv.  23,         - 

2  Peter  iii.  18,  compared   with  Isaiah  xliii.  3,  on  the  term  ^^^ 

Joh^nS  compared  with  Psalm  xxiii.  1,  on  the  term  Shep- 


herd,         -  ^  .• 

1  Cor.  X.  9,  compared  with  Psalm  Ixxviii.  56,  on  tempting 

Christ,      -  "  *  *  "  , 

John  iii.  29,  compared  with  Psalm  [Isaiah]  hv.  5,  on  the 

term  husband,        -  -  "  ',.      ,.        ^u 

Revelation  xxii-  13,  compared  with  Isaiah  xl.v.  6,  on  the 

phrase  "  Alpha  and  Omega," 
Rev.  xxii.  12,  compared  with  Isaiah  xl.  10,  on  the  phrase 
«  My  reward  is  with  me,"  -  •  " 


290 
291 
292 
293 

2pr> 


- 


U6 


Page 


tphes.  iv.  8,  compared  with  Psalm  Ixviii.  18,  on  the  phrase 

"  Thou  hast  ascended  on  high,"  -         -        -        .    296 

John  xix.  37,  compared  with  Zechariah  xii.   10,  on  the 

phrase  "  whom  they  pierced," 297 

1  Peter  ii.  6—8,  compared  with  Isaiah,  xxviii.  16,  and  viii. 

13, 14,  on  the  phrase  "  stone  of  stumbling,"  &c.    -      299,  300 
The  Hebrew  and  other  Asiatic  languages,  full  of  metaphor, 

John  X.  34—36, 

The  Deity  of  Moses  and  of  David  cannot  be  proved  from 

Deut.  XXX.  15  ;  1  Chron.  xxix.  20,         -        -         •         . 
Personalinterest  does  not  influence  the  author 5  nor  desire 

of  fame,  -         .        •        . 

Nor  the  hope  of  success, 

But  reverence  for  the  author  of  Christianity,  and  a  wish  to 

raise  it  above  all  polytheistical  systems. 
The  author's  views  derived  from  the  Scriptures, 
The  Old  Testament  should  be  studied  before  the  New,      - 
Lockers  testimony  respecting  the  fundamental  articles  of 

Christianity,       -. 

Extract  from  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  pointing  out  the  different 
natures  of  God  and  Christ,  -         -         .         -         . 

Argument  in  favour  of  the  Trinity,  from  its  analogy  to  the 
triangle,  considered,  

Several  arguments  occurring  in  the  beginning  of  Serle's 
Horae  Solitariae,  considered, 

Conclusion,  ---•.._ 


-  301 


-  302 


303 
304 

ib. 

ib. 

305 

ib. 

S06 

ib. 


308 
312 


I 


It 

■'  'f  1 


I't 


1)1' 


;: 


144 


M 


POSTSCRIPT. 


Dr.  Prideaux-s  assertion  respecting  the  testimony  of  Jona- 
than's Tarcum  on  Isaiah  ix.  6,  7,  examined, 
The  term  "  Messiah"  applied  to  various  kings, 
Quotations  from  several  ancient  Jewish  commentators, 
On  the  difference  of  meaning  between  «  to  be  called"  and 

«tobe,"  --■"'"."" 

Passages  illustrating  the  epithets  employed  in  Isaiah  ix.  6,  - 
The  terms  "  Son"  and  ''  only-begotten"  incompatible  with 

the  nature  of  the  First  Cause, 
The  assertion  respecting  two  sets  of  terms  and  phrases  being 

applied  to  Jesus,  examined, 

No  Hindoo  can  conscientiously  prefer  the  doctrine  of  the 

Trinity  to  Hindooism, 

True  Christianity  is  free  from  Polytheism, 


I'age 

313 

314 

ib. 

315 
316 

ib. 

317 

ib. 
318 


A 


SECOND  APPEAL. 


CHAPTER  I. 

General  Defence  of  the  Precepts  in  Question. 

Thi:  observations  contained  in    No.  I.  of  the 
Quarterly   Series  of  "  The  Friend  of  India  "  on 
the  Introduction  to  «  The  Precepts  of  Jesus,"  aa 
well  as  on  their  defence,  termed  «  An  Appeal  to 
the  Chnstiau  Public,"  are  happily  expresse.l  in  so 
mild  and  Christian-like  a  style,    that   they  have 
not  only  afforded   me  ample  consolation  for  the 
disappointment  and  vexation  I  felt  from  the  per- 
sonality conveyed   in    the  preceding  Magazines, 
(Nos.  20  and  23.)  but  have  also  encouraged  me 
to  pursue    my  researches  after  the    fundamental 
prmciples  of  Christianity  in  a  manner  agreeable 
to  my  feelings,  and  with  such  respect  as  I  should 
always   wish   to  manifest   for  the  situation    and 
character  of  so  worthy  a  person  as  the  Editor  of 
the  Friend  of  India. 

The  Reverend  Editor  labours  in  his  Review  to 
establish  two  points—the  truth  and   excellency  of 
the  miraculous  relations  and  of  the  dogmas  found 
in  the  scriptural  writings— and  2ndly,  the  insuffi- 


22 


'M 


<i 


/ 


,\ 


146 

ciency  of  the  compiled  Precepts  of  ';«»«^;«»«^° 
lead  to  salvation,  unless  accompanied  wuh  the  im- 
portant doctrines  of  the  Godhead  of  Jesus  and  hi. 

atonement.  . 

As  the  Compiler  neither  in  his  Introduction  to 
the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  nor  in  his  defence  of  those 
Precepts,'has  expressed  the  least  doubt  as  to  the 
Lth  of  any  part  of  the  Gospels,  the  arguments 
Idduced  by  the  learned  Editor  to  demonstrate  the 
trut^.  and  excellence  of  the  authority  on  which 
Ty  rest,  are,  I  am  inclined  to  think,  quite  super- 
fluous, and  foreign  to  the  matter  in  question 

The  only  reasons  assigned  by  the  Compiler,  ([m 
the]  Introduction,)  for  separating  the  I'^ecepts  from 
the  abstruse  doctrines  and  miraculous  relation    of 
the  New  Testament,  are,  that  the  former     are  lia- 
ble to  the  doubts  and  disputes  of  Freethinkers 
and  Antichristians,  and  the  latter  are  capable  a 
best  of  carrying  little  weight  with  the  n«tive-fthis 
part  of  the  globe,  the  fabricated  tales  handed  down 
to  them  being  of  a  more  wonderful  nature. 

These  senLents  respecting  the  doctrines  and 
xniracles,   founded  as  they  are  "P""   ""'^^^'f  J^^ 
Lts    do  not,  I  presume,  convey  any  disavowal  or 
do,  bt  of  thei   trlth.  Besides,  in  applying  the  term 
'tbricated"  to  the  tales  received  by  the  creduou 
Hindoos    the  Compiler  clearly  evinced  the  con 
fe^p^bi;  light  in  wU  he  v^-ed  those  lege^^^^^^^ 
and  in  stating  that  the  miracles  of  the  Scriptures 
were  subject  to  the  doubts  of  "  Freethinkers  and 
In^hris  ians,"  it  can  never  fairly  be  supposed 


147 

that  he  meant  himself,  or  any  other  person  labour- 
ing in  the  promulgation  of  Christianity,  to  be  in- 
cluded in  that  class. 

As  to  the  second  point  urged  by  the  Reverend 
Editor,  namely,  that  the  compiled  Precepts  were 
not  sufficient  to  lead  to  salvation,  I  deeply  regret 
that    the   Editor  should   appear  to    have   over- 
looked the  authority  of  the  gracious  author  of  this 
religion  in  the  several  passages  cited  by  the  Com- 
piler in  his  Appeal,  to  prove  beyond  doubt  the 
sufficiency  of  the  Precepts  in  question  to  procure 
eternal  life  ;  as  it  is  almost  impossible  that  so  nu- 
merous quotations,  spreading  over  a  great  part  of 
the  Appeal,  could  have  escaped  his  notice.     The 
Reverend  Editor,   while  endeavouring  to  prove, 
that  the   compiled  Precepts  would  fall  short  of 
guiding  to  peace  and  happiness,  only  illustrates  br 
sacred  authority  the  truth  and  excellency  of  the 
miracles    and  the  doctrines  of  Christianity.    Bu 
such  illustration  can  have  no  tendency  to  demon- 
strate the  position  he  endeavours  to  maintain  ;  I 
am  therefore  under  the  necessity  of  repeating  a 
few  passages  alrea.ly  quoted,    with  some  others, 
showing  that  the  compiled  Precepts  are  sufficient 
to  conduct  the   human  race   to  happiness  ;  and  I 
humbly  entreat  to  know,  if  I  be  persuaded  to  be- 
lieve in  the  divine  origin  of  thoso  passages,  and  in 
the  entire  veracity  of  their  author,   how  I  am  to 
reconcile  their  authority  with  the  position  main- 
tained by  the  learned  Editor,  as  to  the  insufficiency 
of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus  to  guide  to  peace  and 


ti  )| 


i 


II 


('. 


/1 


148 

Lappiness.   Matthe,r,ch.  xxii.  beginning  with  ver. 
87  :  "  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Tliou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind  ;  this  is  the  first  and 
great   commandment.     And    the  second  is   like 
unto  it.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself. 
On   these  two  commandments  hang  all  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets."  Mark,  ch.  xii.  beginning  with 
ver.  29  :  "  And  Jesus  answered  him,  The  first  ot 
all    the   commandments  is.   Hear,  O  Israel,  the 
Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord.     Thou  shall  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
goul,   and  with  all  thy    mind,  and   with  all    thy 
Btrencth  :  this  is  the  first  commandment.  And  the 
second  is  like,  namely  this.   Thou  shalt  love  tly 
neic'hbour  as  thyself.    I  here  is  no  other  command- 
ment greater  than  these."     Matthew,  ch.  vu.  ver. 
12  :  "  Therefore  all  things  whatsoever  yon  would 
that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  you  even  so  to  them  ; 
for  this  is  the  Law  and  the  Prophets."  Luke,  ch.  x. 
from  ver.  25  :  "  And  behold,  a  certain  lawyer  stood 
op  and  tempted  him,  saying.  Master,  what  shall  I 
do  to  inherit  eternal  life  ?  He  said  unto  hmi,  What 
is  written  in  the  Law  ?  .  low  reiidest  thou  ?  He  an- 
swering said  :    Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with 
all  thy  strength,  and  with  all  thy  mind  ;  and  thy 
neighbour  as  thyself.  And  he  said  unto  him,  Thou 
bast  answered  right.  77«.s  do,  and  thou  shnlt  live." 
Matthew,  ch.  vii.  ver.  21  :  "  Not  every  one  that 
saith  unto  me,  Lord  !  Lord  !  shall  enter  into  the 


14J> 

kingdom  of  heaven  ;  but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of 
my  h  ather  who  is  in  heaven.     Many  will  say  unto 
me  n.  that  day,  Lord  !  Lord  !  have  we  not  prophe- 
sied m  thy  name  ;  and  in  thy  name  have  cast  out 
devils  ;  and    n  thy  name  done  many  wonderful 
works  ?  And  then  will  I  profess  unto  rhem  I  never 
knew  you  ;  .lepart  from  me,  ye  that  work  iniquity. 
Therefore   whosoever   heareth   these  sayings  of 
mine,  and  doeth  them,  I  will  liken  him  unto  a  wise 
man,  who  bu.lt  his  house  upon  a  rock  ;  and  every 
one  that  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine,  and  doeth 
them  not,  shall  be  likened  unto  a  foolish  man,  who 
built  his  house  upon  the  sand."    Luke,  ch.  xi.  ver 
27 :  "  Blessed  is  the  womb  (said  a  certain  woman 
to  Jesus)  that  bare  thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou 
hast  sucked  :  but  he  said,  Yea  rather,  blessed  are 
they  that  hear  the  word  of  God,  and   keep  it." 
John,  ch.  XV.  ver.  12  :  «  This  is  my  commandment, 
that  ye  love  one  another,  as  I  have  loved  you." 
Ver.  17:  "These things  Icommandyou,thatyelove 
one  another."     Ch.  xiii.  ver.  34  :  "  A  new  com- 
mandment I  give  unto  you,  that  ye  love  one  another ; 
as  I  have  loved  you,  that  ye  also  love  one  another;"' 
35,  «  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my 
disciples,  ifye  have  love  one  to  another."  Observing 
tliose  two  commandments,  (Matt.  ch.  xxii.  ver.  37, 
38,  and  39,)  selected  by  the  Saviour  as  a  substi- 
tute for  ail  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  and  sufficient 
means  to  produce  peace  and  happiness  to  mankind, 
the  Compiler  never  scrupled  to  follow  the  example 


II 


il 


I, 


/A 


160 

» 

set  forth  by  Jesus  himself  in  compiling  such  pre- 
cepts as  include  those  two  commandments,  and 
their  subsidiary  moral  doctrines,  as  a  true  substi- 
tute of  the  Gospel,  without  intending  to  depreciate 
the  rest  of  the  word  of  God.     I  regret  that  the 
Reverend  Editor  should  have  disapproved  ot  this 
compilation,  on  the  ground  that  «  it  is  of  impor- 
tance that  every  compilation  be  given  as  a  sample 
of  the  Sacred  Writings  in  all  their  excellence  and 
importance,  and  not  as  a  substitute  for  the  who  e. 

The  authority  of  St.   Paul,  the  most  exalted 
among  the   primitive  Christians,  quoted  by  the 
Reverend  Editor,   (page  89,)  "  If  righteousness 
come  by  the  law,  Christ  is  dead  in  vam,     is  not,  1 
presume,  adequate,  to  set  aside,  nor  even  applica- 
ble  to   the   express  authority  of  the    Author  ot 
Christianity  already  quoted  ;  as  the  latter  includes 
not  only  the  Mosaic  law,  to  which  St.  Paul  alludes, 
but  both  law  and  religion,    as  is  evident  from  the 
following  passages  :  "  Therefore  all  things  what- 
ever vou  would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  you 
even'  so   to   men  ;  for  this   is  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets."  "On    these  two  commandments    (to 
love  God  and  to  love  our  neighbours)  hang  ail  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets."    Every    one  must  admit, 
that   the    gracious    Saviour   meant  by  the   words 
«  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,"  all  the  divine  com- 
mandments found  in  the  Scriptures,  obedience  to 
which  is  strictly  required  of  us  by  the  founder  of 
that  religion.     Luke,   eh.  xi.  ver.  28  :  "  Blessed 
are  they  that  hear  the  word  of  God,  and  keep  it. 


, 


i5I 

John,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  15  :  "  If  you  love  me,  keep  my 
commnndments."      Had  the  manifestation  of  love 
towards  God  with  all  our  strength,  and  towards 
our  neighbours  as  ourselves,    been  practically  im- 
possible, as  maintained  by  the  Editor,  (page  112,) 
or  had  any  other  doctrines  been  necessary  to  lead 
to  eternal  life,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  (in   whose  ve- 
racity, candour,    and  perfection,  we  have  happily 
been  persuaded  to  place  implicit  confidence,)  could 
not,  consistently  with  his  office  as  the  Christ  of  God, 
have  enjoined  the  lawyer  to  the  obedience  of  those 
two  commandments,  and  would  not  have  promised 
him  eternal  life  as  the  reward  of  such  obedience  ; 
(Tide  Luke,  ch.  x.  ver.  28,  "  this  do  and  thou  shall 
live  ,-"j   for  a  man  possessed  of  common   sense 
and  common  humanity  would  not  incite  another  to 
labour  in  vain  by  attempting  what  was  practically 
impossible,  nor  delude    him  with  promises  of  a 
reward    upon   conditions    beyond     his   power   to 
fulfil  ;  much  less    could  a  Being,  in  whom  dwelt 
all  truth,   and  who  was  sent  with  a  divine  law  to 
guide  mankind  by  his  preaching  and  example,  in- 
culcate precepts  that  it  was  impracticable  to  fol- 
low.    Any  commandment  enjoining  man   to  love 
God  with  all  his  heart  and  all  his  strength,  requires 
of  us  of  course  to  direct  our  love  towards  him  as 
the  sole  Father  of  the    Universe  ;  but  does  not 
amount  to  a  prohibition  of  the  pursuits  necessary 
for  life,  or  to  an  abstinence  from  love  towards  any 
other  object  ;  for  such  love  also  is  enjoined  by  the 
subsequent  commandment.    The  following  passa- 


'I 


(I 


i  > ' 


ges,  John,  ch.  XIV.  ver.  21,  "  He  that  hath  my 
commandments  and   keepeth  them,  he  it  i8  that 
loveth  me  :  and  he  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  ot 
my  Father ;  and  I  will  love  him,  and  will  manifest 
inyseltto  him  :"  Ch.  xv.  ver  10,  "  If  ye  keep  my 
commandments,  ye  shall  abide  in  my  love  :"  ver. 
14    "  Ye  are  mv  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  1 
command  you,"'&c.,  and  many  other  passages  of 
a  similar  import,  exhibit  clearly,  that  love  of,  and 
adherence  to  Jesus,  can  be  evinced  solely  by  obe- 
dience to  the  divine  commandments.     But  if  the 
observance  of  those  commandments  be  treated  as 
practically  impossible,  the  love  of  Jesus  and  ad- 
herence to  bin.   must  likewise  be  so  considered, 
and  Christianity  altogether  regarded  as   existing 

only  in  theory.  ,^      u 

I  appeal  to  the  Reverend  Editor  himself,  whe- 
ther we  are  to  set  at  defiance  the  express  command- 
ments of  Jesus,  under  the  supposition  that  manifes- 
tation of  the  love  enjoined  by  him  is  practically  im- 
possible ?  Yet  this  we  must  do,  ifwe  are  to  adept  the 
position  of  the  Editor,  found  in  his  Review,  page 
111,  «  that  the  most  excellent  precepts,  the  most 
perfect  law,  can  never  lead  to  happiness  and  peace, 
unless  by  causing  men  to  take  refuge  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  cross ;"  meaning,  1  presume,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Jesus  on    the 
cross,  as  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of  mankind. 

As  the  Reverend  Editor  has  most  fairly  and 
justly  confined  himself  to  arguments,  founded  on 
,he  authoritv  of  the   divine   Teacher  himself,  I 


should  hope  to  be  allowed  to  beg  him  to  point  out, 
m  order  to  establish  his  position,  even  a  single  pas- 
sage pronounced  by  Jesus,  enjoining  a  refuge  in 
such  a  doctrine  of  the  cross,  as  all-sufficient  or  in- 
dispensable for  salvation  ;  so  that  his  position,  ii,us 
supported,  may  be  placed  in  competition  with  that 
founded  on  those  passages  which  I  have  quoted  in 
the  foregoing  paragraph,  showing  both  the  indis- 
pensableness  and  the  all-sufficiency  of  the  excel- 
lent Precepts   in  question    to  procure  salvation  ; 
and  may  impel  us  to  endeavour  to  reconcile  con- 
tradictions, which  would  in  that  case  be  shown  to 
subsist  between  the   passages,  declarincr  the  all- 
sufficency   of  the   moral  precepts  preached    by 
Christ  for  eternal  life,  and  those   that  might    bo 
found  to  announce  the  indi.spensableness'of  the 
doctrine  of  the  cross  for  everlasting  happiness. 
It  IS  however  evident,  that  the  human   race  are 
naturally  so  weak,  and  so  prone  to  be  led  astray, 
by  temptations  of  temporary  gratifications,  that  the 
best  and  wisest  of  them  fall  far  short  of  manifest- 
mg  a  strict  obedience  to  the  divine  command- 
ments, and  are  constantly  neglecting  the  dutythev 
owe  to  the  Creator  and  to  their  fellow  creatures'; 
nevertheless,  in   reliance  on  numerous   promises' 
found  in  the  sacred  writings,  we  ought  to  enter- 
tain every  hope  of  enjoying  the  blessings  of  par- 
don from  the  merciful  Father  through  repentance, 
which  is  declared  the  only  means  of  procuring  for- 
giveness of  our  failures.     I  have  already  quoted 
some  of  these  comforting  passages  in  my  Appeal, 
page  110  ;  but  as  the  Reverend  Editor  seems   to' 

23 


! 


'I 


4 


154 

liave   entirely  overlooked  them,   and    omitted  to 
notice  them  in  any  of  his  publications,  I  deem  it 
necessary  to  repeat  them  here  with  a  few  additions. 
EzekieU  chap,  xviii.  ver.  30:    "Repent  and  turn 
yourselves  from  all  your  transgressions,  so  iniquity 
shall  not  be  your  ruin."     Luke,  chap,  xiii.  ver.  3 : 
"  Except  you  repent,  you  shall  all  likewise  perish." 
Chap.  XV.  ver.  7  :  "  I  say  unto  you,  that  likewise  joy 
shall  be  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repenteth, 
more  than  over  ninety  and  nine  persons  who  need 
no  repentance."     Matthew,  chap.  ix.  ver.  13  :  "  I 
am  come  not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  re- 
pentance."      Chap.   iii.  ver.  2,  John  the  baptist 
preached,  saying,    "  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand  ;"  and  Jesus,  after  his  resurrec- 
tion, lastly,  directs  his  disciples,  Lw/rc,  chap.  xxiv. 
ver.  47,  "  That  repentance  and  remission  of  sins 
should  be  preached  in  his  name  among  all  nations, 
beginning  at  Jerusalem,"  wherein  he  declares  the 
remission  of  sins  as  an  immediate  and  necessary 
consequence  of  repentance. 

The  foregoing  authorities  and  remarks  will,  I 
trust,  suffice  with  every  candid  reader,  as  my  apo- 
logy for  persisting  in  the  conviction,  that  the  Pre- 
cepts compiled  and  published  as  a  guide  to  peace 
anc^   happiness,   though  deficient    in    respect   to 
speculative  doctrines  and  creeds,  as  well  as  nar- 
rative, yet  contain  all  that  is  essential  in  practical 
Christianity ;  since  they  teach  us  the  performanco 
of  our  duty   to  God  and  to  our  fellow  creatures, 
and  the  most  acceptable  atonement  on  our  part  to 
the  All-merciful,  when  we    have  fallen  short  of 
mat  duty. 


CHAPTER  II. 

Natural  Inferiority  of  the  Son  to  the  Father. 

In  endeavouring  to  prove  what  he  represents  as 
'•'  the  most  abstruse,    and  yet  the  most  important 
of  doctrines,  the  Deity  of  Jesus  Christ,"  the  Reve- 
rend Editor  advances  seven  positions  :   1st,  that 
Jesus  was  possessed  of  ubiquity,  an  attribute  pe- 
culiar to  God  alone.  2ndly,  That  he  declared  that 
a  knowledge  of  his  nature  was  equally  incompre- 
hensible with  that   of  the  nature  of  God.     3dly, 
That  he  exercised   the  power  of  forgiving  sins, 
the  peculiar  prerogative  of  God.  4thly,  That  he 
claimed  almighty  power,  "  in  the  most  unequivo- 
cal manner."  5thly,  That  his  heavenly  Father  had 
committed  to  him  the  final  judgment  of  all  who 
have  lived  since  the  creation.    6thly,  That  he  re- 
ceived worship  due  to  God  alone.     7thly,  That  he 
associated  his   own  name  with  that  of  God  the 
Father  in  the  sacred   rite  of  baptism.     The  facts 
on  which  the  Editor  labours  to  establish  these 
positions,  however,  seem  to  me,  upon  an  impartial 
examination,    not  only  unfavourable  to  his  infe- 
rence, but  even  confirmatory  of  the  opposite  opi- 
nion.    For,  admitting  for  a  moment  that  the  posi- 
tions of  the  Editor  are  well  founded,  and  that  the 
Saviour  was  in  possession  <>f  attributes  and  powers 


/I 


I 


; 


;  U 


^     /^ 


150 

ascribed  to  God  ;  have  we  not  his  own  express 
and  often  rci)eated  avowal,  that  all  the  powers  he 
manifested   were  committed  to  hini  as  the  Son, 
by  the   Fatlu^r   of  the   Universe?  And    docs  not 
reason  force  us  to  infer,  that  a  Being  who  owes 
to  another  all  his  power  and  authority,  however 
extensive  and  high,  shouUl  be  in  reality  considered 
inferior  to  that  other?  Surely,  therefore,  those  who 
believe   God  to  be  Supreme,  possessing  the  per- 
fections  of  all   attributes,    independently  of    all 
other  beings,  must  necessarily  deny   the  identity 
of  Christ  with  God  :  as  the  sun,  although  he  is 
the  most  powerful  and  most  splendid  of  all  known 
created  ihinas,  the  greatest  immediate  source  of 
life  and  enjoyment  in  this  world,  has  yet  no  claim 
to   be  considered   identical  in    nature  with  God, 
who  has  given  to  the  sun  all  the  light  and  anima- 
ting  warmth  which  he  sheds  on  our  globe.     To 
effect  a  material  change  without  the  aid  of  physi- 
cal means,  is  a  power    peculiar  to  God  ;  yet  we 
find   this  power  exercised  by   several  of  the  pro- 
phets on  whom  the  gift  of  miracles  was  bestowed. 
Besides,  it  is  evident,  from   the  first  chapter   of 
Genesis,  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  creation  God 
bestowed  on    man  his  own  likeness,  and    sove- 
reignty  over  all  living  creatures.     Was  not   his 
own  likenessand  that  dominion  peculiar  toGod, be- 
fore mankind  wen-  made  partakers  of  them  ?  Did 
God  then  deify  man  by  such  mark  of  distinction  .'' 

The  following  passages,  I  presume,  suffice  to 
illustrate  the   entire  dependence  of  the  Son  on 


157 

God,  and  his  inferiority  and  subjection  to,  and  his 
hymg  by  him.    St.  John,cM.  x.  vers.  17  and  18  : 
1  lierefore  doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay 
down  my  life,  that  1  might  take  it  again.    No  man 
taketh  it  from  me,  but  J  lay  it  down  of  myself.     I 
have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  \  have  power  to  take 
It  again.      This  commandment  have  [received of 
my  Father."     Chap.  xii.  ver.  49  :  "  For  f    have 
not  spoken  of  myself;   but  the  Father  who  sent 
me,  he -rave  me  the  commandment  what  I  should 
sav.  and  what  I  should  speak."    Chap.  xiv.  ver.  31 : 
"But  that  the   world  may  know   that  I  love  the 
Father,  and  «.,  the  I' at.'tcr gave  me  commandment 
even  so  I  do."    Chap.  xvii.  vers.  1  and  2,  Jesus  in 
his  prayer-"  Glovify  thy  Son,  that  thy  Son  also 
may  glorify  thee  ;  as  thou  hast  given  him  power 
over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as 
many  as  thou  hast  given  him^     John,  chap,  iii 
ver.  35  :  "  The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  an.l  hath 
given  all  things  into  his  hand."  Chap.  v.  ver.  19  • 
"  The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  but  what  he 
seeth  the  Father  do,"  &c.  22  :   «  For  the  Father 
judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  committed  all  judcrment 
unto  the  Son."  30 :  "  /  can  of  mine  own  self  do 
nothing:  as  I  hear  f  judge  ;  and  myjudirment  is 
just ;  because  /  seek  not  my  own  icill,  hid  the  will 
of  the  Father  who  hath  sent  me."    Chap.  vi.  ver. 
37  :  «  All  that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to 
me,"  &c.   38  :  '•  For  I  came  down  from  heaven,  not 
to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the  trill  oj  him  that  sent 
me."   Chap.  viii.  ver.  28  :   «  T/iat  I  do  nothin<r 


I 


'    ^ 


li 


i.">a 


\ 


of  myself ;  but  as  my  Father  kath  taught  mc, 
I  speak    these  things."    Ver.  50  :  «  I  seek  not 
my  own  glory  ;  there  is   one  that  seekcth  and 
judgeth."    Chap.  xiv.  ver.  24  :  "  The  word  which 
ye  hear  is  not  mine,  but  the  Father's  which  sent 
me"    Ver.  31  :  "  As  the  Father  gave  me  com- 
mandment, even  so  I  do."  And  after  his  resurrec- 
tion Jesus  saith,  Ch.  xx.  ver.  21,  "A'  '«^  ^f'''^ 
hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you"    Ver.  17  . 
ascend  unto  my  Father  and  your  Father,  to  my 
God  and  7jour  God."     Matthetc,  ch.  xu.  ver.  18, 
from  Isaiah  :  "  Behold  my  servant,  whom  I  have 
chosen ;  my   beloved,   in   whom  my  soul   is  well 
pleased  ;  Fwill  put  my  spirit  upon  him,  and  ho 
shall  show  judgment  to  the  Gentdes."    Ch.  xxvm. 
ver  18  •  "  And  Jesus  came  and  spoke  unto  them, 
saying,  Alt  poiocr  is  given  unto  me  in   heaven 
and  in  earth."   Luke,  ch.  I  ver.  ^2:   "He  shall  be 
.reat,  and  shall  be  called  the  Son  o/  the  Highest  : 
and  the  Lord  God  shall  give  unto  Aim  the  throne 
of  his  father  David."    For  testimony  that  he  lived 
by  the  Father,    see  John  vi.  57  :  "  As  the   iving 
Father  hath  sent  me,  and  I  lire  by  the  Fatlier 
&c.  Ch.  v.  ver.  26  :  "  For  as  the  Father  hath  life 
in  himself,  so  hath  he  given  to  the  Son  to  have 

life  in  himself." 

As  the  Reverend  Editor  in  two  instances  quoted, 
perhaps  inadvertently,  the  authority  of  the  Apos- 
tles, i  think  myself  justified  in  introducing  some 
of  the  sentiments  entertained  by  them  on  this  sub- 
ject, though  I  should  be  contented  to  deduce  my 


15y 

arguments,  as  proposed  by  the  Editor,  exclusively 
Irom  t!ie  direct  authority  of  Jesus  himself.   I  shall 
confine    myself  to  the  quotation  of  one   or   two 
texts  from   the  Epistles  of  St.   Paul.     1st  Co- 
nnthtans,  ch.  xv.  vers.  24-28  :  "  Then  cometh 
the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the  king- 
domto  God,  even  the  Father.    For  he  must  reign 
till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.     The 
last  enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death.    For 
he  hath   put   all   things   under  -his    feet.     But 
when  he  saith,  all  things  are  put  under  him,  it  is 
inanifest  that  he  is  excepted  which  did  put  all 
things  under  him.     And  when  all  things  shall  be 
subdued  under  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  him- 
self be  subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things  under 
htm,  that  God  may  be  all  in  all."  Colossians,  ch. 
K  ver.   15  :  "  Who  is  the  image  of  the   invisible 
liod,  the  first-born  of  every  creature." 

From   a  due   attention  to  the  purport  of  the 
above  quoted  texts,  and  to  the  term  Son,  distinct- 
ly mentioned  in  ihem,  the  reader  will,  I  trust    be 
convinced,  that  those  powers  were  conferred  on 
Jesus,  and  declared  by  himself  to  have  been  recei- 
ved by  him  from  the  Father,  as  the  Messiah,  ('hrist 
or  anointed  Son  of  God,  an.l  not  solely  in  his  hu- 
man capacity  ;  and  that  such  interpretation  as  de- 
clares the.se  an.l  other  passages  of  a  similar  effect 
to  be  applicable  to  Jesus  as  a  man,  is  an  unscrip- 
tural  invention.     Jesus  spoke  of  himself  through- 
out all  the  Scriptures  only  as  the  promised  Mes- 
siah, vested  with  high  glory  from  the  beginning  of 


tv 


A 


!■ 


IGO 

the  world.    JoAn,  ch.xvn.vcr.5':  "  And  now,  O 
'ather,  glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self,  w,  h 
he  glorj  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  word 
was'    In  this  passage,  with  the  same  breath  with 
which  he  prays  for  glory,  he  i.ientifies  then^mn. 
in   which  he  does   so  with  that  .mder  wh.ch  he 
lived  with  God  before  the  creation  of  the  world, 
and  of  course  before  his  assuming  the  office  of  the 
Messiah.    Ver.  24  :  "  Father,  1  will  ll^'^t^Kv  a^o 
whom  thou  hast  given  me  be  mth  me  -^^IZ^t 
ihat  they  may  behold  my  glory,  which  thou  hast 
.i,enme  :  for  thou  lovedst  me  hefore  thefonnda- 
lion  of  the  world."    Here  again  Jesus  prays,   ha 
his  Apostlesmay  witness  such  honour  as  he  l  a thet 
had  bestowed  on  him,  even  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world.  Ch.  ix.  vers.  3..-37  :  "Dos  thou 

(says  Jesus  to  a  man  who  ha.l  been  bl.n.l)      be- 
lieve on  the  Son  of  God?  He  answered  and  sa.d 
Who  is  he,  Lord,  that  I  n.ight  believe  on  h.m 
And  Jesus  said  unto  hin.,  Thou  hast  both  .mi  him 
and  it  is  he  (the  Son  of  G.A)that  tolMhwUh 
theer     Ch.  xvii.  vers.  1,2:"  Father,  glordy  thy 
Son;  as   thou    hast  given  him  power  over  all 
flesh,  that  he  shouM  give  eternal  life  to  as  nriany  as 
thou  hast  ,iven  him^   John  the  Bapt.st,  who  bore 
witness  of  Christ,  lo.)ked  not  upon  h.m  m  any  othci 

view  than  as  the  Son  of  God.  ^^'••^;^/''';;,2, 
34  .  "  And  I  saw  and  bare  record,"  (said  John 
the' Baptist,  pointing  out  the  person  of  Jesus,) 
«  that  this  is  the  Son  of  God."  John,ch.  vuk  ver. 
^2 :  "  I  t)roceeded  forth  and  came  from   V.oU  , 


■ 


iOi 

7i€it/ier  came  1  of  myself,  but  he  sent  me^  And  lu 
numerous  passages  Jesus  declares,  that,  before  he 
assumed  the  office  of  the  Messiah  in  this  world,  he 
was  entirely  subject  to  and  obedient  to  the  Father, 
from  v/hom  he  received  thecommission  to  come  to 
this  world  for  the  salvation  of  mankind.     But  ap- 
parently with    the   very  view  of  anticipating  any 
niisapprchension  of  his  nature  on  the  part  of  his 
disciples,  to  whom  he  had  declared  the  wonderful 
extent  of  the  powers  committed  to  him  by  the  Fa- 
ther, he  tells  them,  John,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  28,  "  The 
Father  is  greater  than  I."   h  would  have  been  idle 
to  have  informed  ihem  of  a  truth,  of  which,  as 
Jews,  they  would  never  have  entertained  the  small- 
est question,  that  in  his   mp'%    corporeal   nature 
Jesus  was  inferior  to  his   Maker;  and  it    must 
therefore  have  been  his  spiritual  nature,  of  which 
he  here  avowed  the  inferiority  to  that  of  God. 

"  The  Son"  is  a  term  which,  when  used  without 
being  referred  to  another  proper  name  found  in  the 
context,  implies  invariably  the  Son  of  God  through- 
out the  whole  New  Testament,  especially  when  as- 
sociated with  the  epithet  ''  l^he  Father  ;"  so  the 
latter  epithet,  when  it  stands  alone,  signifies  '^  the 
Father  of  the  universe."  Matthew,  ch^xxviii.  ver. 
19  :  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,' 
baptising  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Ch.  xi.  ver.  27  : 
"  No  man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father,"  &c. 
Vide  rest  of  the  Gospel.— It  is  true  indeed,  that 
the  angels  of  God,  and  some  of  the  ancients  of  the 

24 


'  w 


c 


i 


■*    /j 


HJJ 


166 


human  race,  as  well  as  the  children  of  Israel,  are 
honoured  in  the  sacred  writings  with  the  name  of 
-  Sons  of  God.".     Job,  ch.  i.  ver.  6  :  "  There  was 
a    day  when  the  sons  of  God   came  to  present 
themselves  before  the  Lord."   Gfnesis,  ch.  vi.  ver. 
2  :   *'  The  sons  of  God  saw  the  daughters  of  men, 
that    they    were   fair."  Hoseay   ch.   i.    ver.     10: 
**  Then  it  shall  be  said  unto  them,  ye  are  tlic  sons 
of  the  lirivg  Gocir    Yit   the   epithet  "  gen  of 
God,"  with  the  definite  article  prefixed,  is  appro- 
priated to  Christ,  the  first-born  of  every  creature,as 
a  distinct  mark  of  honour  which  he  alone  deserves. 
The  Saviour  having  declared  that  unity  existed 
between  the  Father  and  iiimself,  John,  ch.  x.  ver. 
30,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one,"  a  doubt  arose  with 
regard  to  the  sense  in  which  the  unity  affirmed  in 
those  words  should  be  accepted.     This  Jesus  re- 
moves by  defining  the  unity  so  expressed  as  a  sub- 
sisting concord  of  will  and  design,  such  as  existed 
amongst  his  Apostles,   and  not  identity  of  being  : 
vide   ch.  xvii.  ver.    11,  of  John,  "Holy  Father, 
keep  through  thine  own  name  those  whom  thou 
hast  given  me,  that  thty  may  be  one,  as  we  are.'' 
Ver.  22  :  "  The    glory    which    thou  gavest  me  I 
have  given  them  ;  that  they  may  be  one,  even  as 
tee  are  one,''  Should  any  one  understand  by  these 
texts  real  unity  and   identity,  he  must  believe  that 
there  existed  a  similar  identity  between  each  and 
all  of  the  Apostles;— nay,  even  that  the  disciples 
also  were  included  in  the  Godhead,  which  in  that 
case  would  consist  of  a  great  many  times  the  num- 


ber of  persons  ascribed  to  the  Trinity.  JohUy  ch. 
xvii.  vers.   20—23  :  "  Neither   pray  I  for   these 
alone,  but  for  them  also  which  shall  believe  on  me 
through  their  word — That  they  all  may  be  one ;  as 
thou.  Father,  art  in  me,  and  1  in  thee,  that  they 
also  may  be  one  in  us. — That  they  inay  be  one, 
even  as   we  are  one.     I  in   them,   and  thou  in 
me  :  that  they  may  be  made  perfect  in  one."     I 
know  not  how  it  is  possible  for  those  who  profess 
obedience  to  the  word    of  Christ  to  overlook  the 
explanation  he  has  here  so  clearly  given  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  unity  existing  between    him   and  the 
Father,  and  to  adopt  a  contrary  system,  apparently 
introduced  by  some  Heathen  writers  to  suit  their 
polytheistical  prejudices;  but  I  doubt  not  the  Edi- 
tor of  the  Friend  of  India  will  admit  the  necessity 
of  giving  preference  to  divin(j   authority  over  any 
human  opinion,  however  prevailing  it  may  be. 

The  Saviour  meant  unity  in  design  and  will  by 
the  assertion  also,  that  he  was  in  God,  or  dwelt  in 
God,  and  God  in  him.  John,  ch.  x.  ver.  38  : 
"  That  ye  may  know,  and  believe,  that  the  Father 
is  in  me,  and  I  in  him,"  as  evidently  appears  from 
the  following  passages  : — Jolui,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  20  : 
"  At  that  day  ye  shall  know,"  (addressing  his  Apos- 
tles,) "  that  I  am  in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and 
I  in  you."  Ch.  xvii.  ver.  21  :  ''  That  they  all  may 
be  one  ;  as  thou.  Father,  art  in  me,  and  1  in  thee, 
that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us."  John,  ch.  vi. 
ver.  56 :  "  He  that  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh 
my  blood,  dwelleth  in  me,  and  I  in  him."  1  John, 


^ 


1 1 


^>l 


T 


/ 


164 

ch.  IV.  ver.  15  :  "  Wliosoever   shall  confess  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God— God  dwelleth  in  him, 
and  he  in  God.''''     There  appear  but  three  modes 
in  which  such  passages  are  capable  of  interpreta- 
tion.    1st,  As  conveying  the  doctrine  that  the  Su- 
preme being,  the  Son  and  the  Apostles,  were  to  be 
absorbed    mutually   as   drops  of  water  into   one 
whole  ;  which  is  conformable  to  the   doctrines  of 
that  sect  of  Hindoo  metaphysicians,  who  maintain, 
that  in  the  end  the  human  soul  is  absorbed  into  the 
Godhead  ;  but  is  quite  inconsistent  with  the  foith 
of  all  denominations  of  Christians.    2dly,  As  pro- 
ving   an   identity  of  nature,  with   distinction    of 
person,    between   the   Father,  the  Son,    and  the 
Apostles  ;  a  doctrine  equally  inconsistent  with  the 
b(dief  of  every  Christian,  as  multiplying  the  num- 
ber of  persons  of  the   Godhead  far   beyond  what 
hfis  ever  been  [)roposed  by  any  sect  :  or  3dly,  As 
expressing  thai  unity  \\\\\c\\\^  said  to  exist  where- 
ever  there  are    found  perfect  concord,  harmony, 
love,  and  obedience,   such  as  the   Son  evinced  to- 
wards the  Father,  and  taught  the  disciples  to  dis- 
play towards  the  divine  will. — That  the  language 
of  our  Saviour  can  be  understood  in  this  last  sense 
solely,  will,   I  trust,   be  readily  acknowledged  by 
every  candid  expounder  of  th(^  sacred  writings,  as 
being  the  only  one  alike  warranted  by  the  common 
use  of  words,  and  capable  of  apprehension  by  the 
human  understanding.     Had  not  experience,  in- 
deed, too   clearly  proved  that  such  metaphorical 
expressions,  when  taken  singly  and  without  atten- 


165 

tion  to  their  contexts,  may  be  made  the  foundation 
of  doctrines  quite  at  variance  with  the  tenor  of  the 
rest  of  the  Scriptures,  I  should  liave  had  no  hesi- 
tation in  submitting  indiscriminately  the  whole  of 
the  doctrines  of  the  New  Testament  to  my  coun- 
trymen ;  as  I  should  have  felt  no  apprehension 
that  even  the  most  ignorant  of  them,  if  left  to  the 
guidance  of  their  own  unprejudiced  views  of  the 
matter,   could  misconceive  tlie  clear  and  distinct 
assertions  tfiey  every  where  contain  of  the  unity  of 
God  and  subordinate  nature  of  his  messenger  Je- 
sus   Christ.     Many   of  these  have  been    already 
quoted  ;  to  which  may  be  added  the  following  : 
John,  ch.  xvii.  ver.  d  :  "  This  is  life  eternal,  that 
theymiffht  know  thee  theonhj  true  God,  and  Jesus 
Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent''     Here  Jesus  in  ad- 
dressing the  Father  declares,  that  the  means  to  be 
afforded  for  eternal  salvation,  were  a  knowledge  of 
God,  and  of  himsell  as  the  anointed  messenger  of 
God.  Also,ch.xix.  ver.  17,C1)rist  sairh,  "  VVhycall- 
est  thou  me  good  ?  there  is  none  good  but  one,  that 
IS  God.  "  Here  Jesus,pure  as  he  was  and  without  re- 
proach, thinks  it  necessary  to  check  the  man  who 
applies  to  him  an  epithet  justly  due  to  God  only. 
Ch.  xiv.  ver.  1  :  "  Let  not  yocn-  heart  b(?  troubled  : 
ye  believe  in  God  ;  believe  also  in  me."  In  these 
words  Jesus  commands  his  disciples  to  put  their 
trust  in  God,  and  further  to  believe  in  him  as  the 
Messenger  of  God  ;  and  thus  plainly  distinguishes 
himself  from  the  Godhead.     Nor  can  it  for  a  mo- 
ment be  understood   by  the  following  passage. 


li 


hi 


^ 


r^ 


f 


\m 


John,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  9,  "  He  that  hath  seen  me,  hatli 
seen  the  Father,"  that  God  was  literally  and  mate- 
rially visible  in  the  Son — a  doctrine  which  would 
be  directly  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  religion 
taught  by  Jesus,  and  by  all  the  prophets  of  God. 
Vide  John,  ch.  iv.  ver.  24 :  **  God  is  a  Spirit." 
The  Apostles  also  maintained  a  belief  of  the  im- 
materiality and  invisibility  of  God.  1  7Vm.  ch. 
vi.  ver.  16  :  **  Whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  can 
see."  1  John,ch.  iv.  ver.  12:  "No  man  hath  seen 
God  at  any  time."  Besides,  Jesus  explains  him- 
self in  the  two  passages  immediately  succeeding, 
that  by  the  phrase,  **  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath 
seen  tlie  Father,"  he  meant  only  that  whosoever 
saw  him  and  the  works  performed  by  him,  witness- 
ed proofs  of  the  entire  concord  of  his  words  and 
actions  with  the  will  and  design  of  the  Father,  and 
ought  therefore  to  have  admitted  the  truth  of  his 
mission  from  God.  John,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  9  :  "  He  that 
hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father.  How  sav^st 
thou  then,  Shew  us  the  Father  ?"  Ver.  10:  "  Be- 
Jievestthou  not  that  i  am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  me  ?  The  words  that  I  spciak  unto  you 
I  speak  not  of  myself;  but  the  Father,  that  dwcll- 
eth  in  me  he  doeth  the  works."  Ver.  11:"  Be- 
lieve me,  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father 
in  me:  or  else  believe  me  for  the  very  works'  sake." 
We  have  already  seen  in  what  sense  the  expression 
"  dwelleth  in  me"  must  be  understood,  unless  we 
admit  thai  all  true  followers  of  Christ  are  admitted 
as  portions  of  the  Godhead.  John,  ch.vi.  ver.  56  : 


<       ; 


167 
''  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  n,y  biood 

J-  o.  my  conviction,  and  for  the  satisfaction  of 
those  who  consider  the  Precepts  of  Jesus  as  a 
g".de  to  peace  and  happiness,  his  word.  «  Thev 
may  be  one  as  we  are."  Jokn,  ch.  xWi.  ver  1 ,  ZZ 

li^fipd  n.  ,1  ^      "',      "'"'^•'o  idolatry,  and  dissa- 

ZlltX     ""'T  '"°""'^  '^  Moossuhnanism 
aga  n.t  Nonmoossuimans.1,  on  my  searching  after 
tl.e  truth  of  Christianity,  felt  for  a  length  J  ime 
very  much  perplexed  with  the  difference  of  semi 
meuts  found   among  the   followers  of  C tS     l" 
mean  Tnn.tarians  and  Unitarians,  the  grand  djv 
-ons  of  them,)  until  I  met  with  th'e  expl      Ln    ^ 
the  unuy  g,ven  by  the  divine  Teacher  him  elf  as 
guide  to  peace  and  happiness.     Besides,  when  tl^ 

1  and  my  Father  are  one,"  and  accused  him  of 
blasphemy,  (ch.  x.  ver.  .33,  "  But  for  blaspiy 
an     because  that  thou,  being  a  man,  maifesUh^' 

nfd  hli  m:;:', -reT/r; '''  ^^^"^"*^"'  ''■ 

maao  hmiselt  God,  saying,  vers.  34— 
36,  Ms   ,t  not  written  in  your  Law,  I  said     Ye 

the  word  of  Cod  came,  and  the  Scripture  cannot 
be  b  oken  ;  say  ye  of  him  whom  the  Father  hath 
ct  ,e,l.  and  sent  into  the  world,  Thou  blasphe 
'"ost  :  bocau.se  /  said,  T  am  the  Son  of  God  ^" 


I,? 


'  i .; 


^   • 


16C 

How  was  It  possible  that  Jesus,  the   founder  of 
truth    and    true  religion,  should  have  disavowed 
the  charge  of  making  himself  God  by  represent- 
ing himself  as  the  Son,  honoured  with  sanctifica- 
tion  by  the  Father,  and  sent  by  him  to  this  world, 
if    he  were   the  true   living  God,    possessed  of 
everlasting  sanctification,  independently  of  another 
heincr?  From  this  and  all  other  local  evidence,  the 
Pharisees    and  chief  priests,    though   inveterate 
enemies  of  the  Saviour,  accused  him  to  Pilate  of 
having  made  himself  the  son  of  God  and  King  of 
the  Jews  ;  but  relinquished  the  charge  of  making 
himself  equal  to  God,  or  having  ascribed  to  him- 
self divine  nature ;  ahhough  the  latter  (i.  e.  ma- 
king himself  God)  was  better  calculated  to  excite 
the  horror  of  the  people.     Vide  John,  ch.  xix.  ver 
7  :  "  The  Jews  answered   him.  We  have  a  law, 
and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die  ;  because  he  made 
himself  the  Son   of  God."     Vide    Matthei.,  ch. 
xxvii.  ver.  37  :  "  And  set  up  over  his  head  his  ac- 
cusation written,  "  This  is  Jesus,  the  King  of  the 
Jews."     43  :  ^'He  trustf.d  in  God  ;  let  him  deli- 
ver him  now,  if  he  will  have  him  :  for  he  said,  I 
am  the  Son  of  God."    That  the  epithet  God  is 
frequently  applied  in  the  sacred  Scriptures  other- 
wise than  to  the  Supreme  Being,  as  pointed  out 
by  Jesus,  may  be  shown  by  the  following,  out  of 
many  instances  to  be  found  in  the  Bible.     Deut. 
ch.  X.  ver.  17  :  "  For  the  Lord  your  God  is  God 
OF  Gods,  and  Lord  of  Lords,"  <fcc.  Ch.  xxxii.ver. 
21  :  "  Thev  have  moved  me  to  jealousy  with  that 


l(i9 

which  is  not  God."  Exodus,  ch.  xii.  ver.  28 ; 
Thou  Shalt  not  revile  the  Gods,  nor  curse  the 
ler  of  thy  people."  Joshua,  ch.  xxii.  ver.  22 : 
The  Loro  God  of  Gods  knoweth."  Fsalm 
IxxxM.ver  I  :  "  God  standeth  in  the  congregation 
o<  the  .nighty  :  hejud<rethamouqtheGods"  fi- 
"  I  have    said.    Ye  are   Gods  ;    and   all  of  you 

are  cini(iren  of  the  miwf  Hi,pi.  "      o  • 

c)     ,  c\     ■  Migli.       Fs.  cxxxvi.  ver. 

*:    'O  give   thanks   unto  the   God  of    Gods'' 
Isaiah,  ch.  xli.    ver.  2.S  :  "  i^hoiv  the  thing,  that 
are  to  come  hereafter,  that  we  may  know  titai  ye 
are  Gods."    Psalm  xcvii  ver.  7  :  "  Worship  him, 
all  ye    Gods."      Zcphaniah,    ch.    ii.    v.-r.    11  • 
"He   will  famish  all  the   Gods  of  Ihe  earth." 
Exodus    ch    iv.  ver.   16  :  "  God  .said    to  Mo.ses, 
that  he  should  he  to  Aaron  instead  of  God  "    Ch 
w..   ver  5 :  "  See,  /  hare  made  thee  a   God  to 
I  haraoh."  Also  1  Corinth,  ch.  viii.  ver.  5  :  "  As 
there  be  Gods  many  and  I.ords  many  ;"  and  the 
verse  already  quoted  from  John,  ch.  x    ver-s  31 
35 :  "  Jesus  answered.  Is  it  not  written  in  your 
Law,    Ye  are  Gods  ?  If  he  call  them  Gods,   to 
whom  the  word  of  God  came,"  &c.     In  none  of 
hese  mstances  is  it  in  any  degree  admissible,  that 
bytheepuhetGoditis  implied,  that  the  human 
boings  to  whom  it  was  attache<l  were  thereby  de- 
clared to  be   a  portion  of  the  G.^lhead.     Moses 
was  to  be  as  a  God  to  Aaron  and  a  God  to  Pha- 
raoh, by  the  express  command  of  the  Almi^rhty  • 
..n  no  Christian  will  thence  argue  the  equality  of 
Moses  wnh  the  Father  of  all  things.     On  what 

25 


i 


^^^-mki^' 


170 


]>rinciple,  then,  can  any  stress  be  laid  in  defence 
of  the  deity  of  the  Hon  on  the  prophelic  expres- 
sion quoted    in  Hebrews  from  Psalm   xlv.  ver.  6, 
''  Thy  throne,  <)  (lod,  is  for  ever  and  ever  ;"  espe- 
cially when  we  find   in  the  next  verse,  words  that 
declare    his  subordinate  nature  ;  "  Thou  lovest 
righteousness  and   hate  st  wickedness  :  therefore 
God,  thy  God,  hath  anointed  ihee  with  the  oil  of 
gladness  above    thy  fellows  ?"  We  cannot  allow 
much  weight  to   the  phrase  "  for  ever,"  as  estab- 
lishing literally  the  eternal  nature  of  the  power  of 
the  Son,  this  phrase  being  often  found  metaphori- 
cally   applied  in  the  Scriptures   to  other  created 
beings  :  as  Proverbs,    ch.   xxix.   ver.  14:    "  The 
king  that  faithfully   judgeth   the  poor,  his  throne 
shall  be  established  for  ever."     Deut,  ch.  iv.  ver. 
40  :  **  And  that  thou  mayest  prolong  thy  days  in 
the  earth,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  for 
ever."     Similar   to  this  is  the  ren.arkable  expres- 
sion of  Jesus  to  Niary  after   his  resurrection,  and 
therefore,    at  a  time   when  no  ciesign  can  be  con- 
ceived to  have  existed  that  could  have  been  advan- 
ced by  his  jmy  longer  withholding  the  knowledge 
of  his  true   nature,    if  any  thing  remained    unre- 
veale<l   during  the  previous   period  of  his  mission 
on  earth.     John,  ch.  xx.   ver.  17:    "Goto    my 
brethren,  and  say  unto  them,  1  ascend  unto  mij 
Fathir  and  your  Father,  and  to  my  God  and 
your  God,^^ 

Ailer  a  slight  attention  to  the  terms  Lord  and 
God  being  often  applied  to  men  in  the  Sacred  Wri- 


171 

tings  can  any  weight  be  allowed  to  the  exclama- 
tion of  the  astonished  disciple,  John,  ch.  xx.  ver. 
28,     My  Lord  and  my  God  ;"  especially  as  the 
apostle  who  relates  the  circumstance,  within  a  few 
versesconcludes  by  saying,  ver.  31,   <^  These  are 
written  that  ye   might  believe   that  J..^,,  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;-  but  nowhere  desirest  he 
readers  of  his   Gospel    to  believe    that  Jesus  is 
God      Does  not  common  sense   point  out  the  in- 
fo  onty  and    subordination    of  a    being,  though 
called  God     to  one   who  is  at  the  same  time  de- 
clared to  be  /..  God,   /..  Father,  h.s  Sanctifier, 
^ndhts  Promoter  to  the  .tate  of  exaltation  ? 

The  passage,  J,/,,,,  eh.  i.  ver.  1,  "The  word  was 
God,  and  the    Word  was  with  God,"  whicli  cZ 

™k;  I   ■.  .  '    ^^   "'®  contradict  on 

which  .t  apparently  implies  with  another  mostde" 
c.s.ve  passage  in  Deut.  ch.  xxxii.  veV.  39,  where 

ht"he7e?""r',  """^  '^^  '^^'''""^'  '^-^^  -'  ' 
h.m  the  e  ts  „o  God  :  "  See  now  that  I,  even  I  am 

he  ;  and  there  is  no  God  with  me  ;"  if  it  should 
be  understood    to  signify  in   both  instan  ' 

Supreme  De.ty.  Should  we  follow,  on  the  o.her 
hand  the  mterpretation  adopted  by  Trinitarian 
Chnstians,  namely,  that  the  Godhead  though  it 
IS  one  yet  consists  of  three  persons,  and  conse- 
quently one  substance  of  the  Godhead,  might 
abide  wuh  the  other,  both  being  equally  God  ;  L 
should  m  that  case  be  forced  to  view  the   God 


/ 


17J 

liend  in  the  same  light  as  we  consider  mankind 
and  other  genera,  for  no  doubt  can  exist  of  the 
imity  of  mankind  : — the  plurality  of  men  con- 
sists in  their  persons  ;  and  therefore  we  may  safe- 
ly, under  the  same  plea,  support  the  unity  of  man, 
notwithstanding  the  plurality  of  persons  included 
under  the  term  mankind.  In  that  case  also  Chris- 
tians oucrht  in  conscience  to  refrain  from  accusing 
Hindoos  of  Polytheism  ;  for  every  Hindoo  we 
daily  observe  confesses  the  unity  of  the  Godhead. 
They  only  advance  a  plausible  excuse  for  their 
Polytheism,  which  is,  that  notwithstanding  the 
unity  of  the  Godhead,  it  consists  of  millions  of 
substances  assuming  difterent  offices  correspond- 
ent to  the  nuiid)er  of  the  various  transactions  su- 
perintended in  the  universe  by  Divine  Providence, 
which  they  consider  as  infinitely  more  nun.jrous 
than  those  of  ihc  Trinitarian  scheme. 

The  J^aviour  in  his  appeal,  "  If  I  do  not  the 
works  of  my  Father  believe  me  not,"  John^  ch. 
X.  ver.  37,  meant  of  course  the  performance  of 
w^orks  [)rescribed  by  the  Father,  and  tending  to 
his  glory.  A  great  number  of  passages  in  the 
^icriptures,  a  few  of  which  I  have  already  cited, 
and  the  constant  practice  of  the  Saviour,  illus- 
trate this  fact  beyond  doubt.  In  raising  Lazarus 
after  he  had  died,  Jesus  prayed  to  the  Father  for  the 
power  of  bringing  him  to  life  again,  and  thanked 
him  for  his  compliance.  John^  ch.  xi.  ver.  41  : 
"  And  iesus  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  said,    Father, 


1  /o 

ltlK...k,|.ee  that  thou  ha.theanl„.e."     Besides 
•n  declaring    that  whosoever   belieup,!  r    i    . 

nevtTs  equal  ty  ,„  power  with  Go.f,  or  to  have  ex 
alted  iliem  above  himself      r  i       ,  ^" 

"Verilu   „     I     ,""''"'•     •'"«w,ch.  XIV.  ver.  12: 

on  me';r"  ^'/  '"^  ""^"  >'°"'  "«  that  believeth 

ver    29     "  ,         ""  '^'^'^  '^''""  ''«  •'"•"     Ch.  vi. 
ver.  29        Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them 
This  ,s  the  work  of  God,  that  ve  6.W  on  him 
whom   he  hath  sent."     ,t  must'he  aZi  Jd'^ 

whi,.i.   T  '^""•onty-      Ihe   wonderfu    works 

which  Jesus  was  empowered  to  oerform    i 
great  number  of  the  Jews  to  a  h^l    7      t     ''''  ^ 

n    he  entire    union  of  will  and  design  tha  'sub 
sisted    be^tween  him  and  the  F-,thJ  , 

Oom   the  followin.r  pas^ales     71'  "f  ^^'P^^'' 

14    "  Th,.n  ,1.  I*^*^^a??es  :  John,  ch.  vi.  ver. 

*.       1  hen  ihose  men,  when  thou  h^A  , 


i 


174 

by  him  and  for  him.  At  the  same  time  I  must,  in 
conformity  to  those  very  authorities,  believe  him 
as  produced  by  the  Supreme  Deity  among  created 
beings.  John,  ch.  v.  ver.  26  :  "  For  as  the  Fa- 
ther hath  life  in  himself,  so  hath  he  given  to  the 
Son  to  have  life  in  himself."  Colossians,  ch.  i. 
ver.  15  :  "  Who  is  the  image  of  the  invisible 
God,  the^rs^  born  of  every  creature.'' 


175 


CHAPTER  III. 

Separate  Consideration  of  the  Seven  Positions 

of  the  Reviewer, 

In  attempting  to  support  his  first  position,  that 
Jesus  was  possessed  of  ubiquity,  the  Rev  rend 
Eduor  has  quoted  two  passages.  The  first  is.St. 
f'hn,  ch  .,..  ver.  13  :  -  No  man  has  ascended  up 

even  the  Son  of  man  who  is  in  heaven  ;»  Where- 
cattrtoU  ^''^E^'^— -ves,  declares  his  lo- 
"me.  The  Editor  rests  entirely  the  force  of  hi, 
pjudse       who  IS  in    Iipjivpii  "    oo     •      •z'  • 

«jng  witli  INicodemus    on  p-nrh       ti  • 

^-   I  .  editn.      Ihisarffumenf 

-f ;'  P-haps   carry  some  weight  with  ifw  "e 
no  the  i  „,^  „,  ^,^  p^^^^^^^  ^^^^^     >      ere 

ente  or  future  sense  observed  in  the  Sacred  Wrl 
t.ngs,  an,l  were  not  a  great  number  of  other  pas- 
sages to   determine    that  the  term    « is,"  in  ^h  s 
n^nce    must  be  understood  in  the  p;st  sent 
John    ch.  vm.  ver.  58  :  "  Jesus  said  unto   them 

was    lam.      Here  tlie  same  verb,  though  found 
nU^form  of  the  present  tense,  must  obviously 
l^e  taken  .n  a  preterite  sense.     John,  ch.  ix.  ver 


^ 


17G 

8  :  **  His  disciples  say  unlo  him,  Master,  the  Jews 
of  late  sought  to  stone  thee,"  &c.  ;  that  is,  His 
disciples  sa/(i  uuto  him.   Ver.  3^3  :  "Jesus  there- 
lore    a^aiu    groaning  in   himself  comcth  to    the 
grave,"  i.  c.  he  came  to  the  grave.     iMatthw,  ch. 
xxvi.  ver.  2  :  ''  Ye  kni)W  lh.it  after  two  days  is  the 
feast   of  the    [)assover,  and  the  Son  of  man  U  be- 
betrayed  to  be  crucilied  ;  that  is,  the  Son  of  man 
is  to  be  betrayed   and  to   be  crucified.      Vtde  the 
remainder    of  the  chapter.     John,    ch.   xiii.   ver. 
G  :  "  Then  comcth  he  to  Simon  Peter,  &c."  that 
is,  he  cameio  Simon  Peter,  &c.     Again,  John, 
ch.    xvi.  ver.  o2  :  "  That  ye  shall  be  scattered, 
every  man  to  his  own,  and  shall  leave  me  alone  : 
yet  i  am  not  alone  :"  i.  t.  yet /.s7i/i//  not  he  alone. 
So  in  all  the  prophecies  contained  in  the  Old,  as 
well  as  in  the  New  Testamtmt,  the    future  tense 
mu=^t  frequenlly  be   understood  where   the  terms 
used  are  tho:<e  grammatically  ap[)ropriate<l  to  the 
preterite:  as  Matthew,  ch.  ii   ver.  \'6,  "  In  Rama 
wa^  there  a  voice  heard,"  that  \^,  will  there  be  ^ 
voice  heard.  Ver.  15,  "  Out  of  Egypt  hare  I  call- 
td  my  Son,"  L  e,  I  wdl  call  my  son.     After  a  dili- 
gent attention  to  the   following  passage,   no  one 
will,  I  presume,  scruple  to  conclude  that  the  Sou 
was  actually  absent  from  heaven  during  his  locali- 
ty on  the  earth,  and  consc-quently  the  phrase  quo- 
ted by   the  Editor  is  applicable  only  to  \\\o  [>ast 
time.     John,  ch.  vi.  ver.  62:  -  What  and  if  ye 
shall  see  the  son  of  man  ascend  up  wIumc^  he  teas 
before."  The    verb  was,    accom[)anicd   with  the 


177 

the ::  h"  Ch  :f v^er  r « ir' ''-  -^^y  ^^ 

vou  thP  fn.tK  ^  •      Nevertheless  1  tell 

00.? unto  ^r.ttTT;'"^  Comforter  wi„  fo^ 
unto  you."  '  Ve'r  5  B„f "'  /  "'"  ^^"'^  '"'» 
i'in,  that  sent  :•;:»•  vl"  ^s""  f  "^  T '? 
fi-om  the  Father  .nd  nm  ■       '''"''  ^"''*^'' 

aanin    I  /  ,  ^"  *''""*  '"to  the  world  • 

?h  x^i  Hfi  T'''  "'^''  ^•^'•'^  ""^^^^ 

T         u  '•     -^^^"^  answered  him    VVhithPr 

I  SO  thou  canst  not  follow  „,e  now,  buT  h^  S 

/«//o2r  me  afterwards  "     CU    ^;-         "yoi'^-falt 

knew  that  hi.  h  "•  ''"•  '  •  "  -'^sus 

further  conviction,  I  may  safely  refer  even  to  the 
preceding   iorm<^    r^r  *u  ^vt  u  lo  me 

Editor        "N        "^•''^■^'"•*'«  --elied    on  by    the 
r    I     T       "  '"^"  '"*^''  ascended  up  to  he  ivpn 

ot  man.       l-or  the  attribute  of  omnipresen.-P   i! 

I- po:.b,et-::S^^ 

of  sud,  passages,  consistent  with  reason  and    on 
formable  to  the  established  orderofinterpo  a"" 

0  the  apparent  meaning  of  a  single  phrase  tZ' 
taken  literalv.   is   tntflll.,    ^  j  P"r,ise,  that, 

sense  ?  For  tV.       .  ^      PP"'*"*^  *°  ^^^""no" 

'em  fri  '    *"■"'    '"'P'^'"g  'J^e  other,)  and 

•sent  from  one  mansion  to  another,  the  attribute  of 
"b.qu,ty  can  never  be  justly  ascribed.  "^ 

Besides,  in  examimng  the  original  Greek  Tes- 

26 


^;  / 


yk    w 


17^ 

tainent,  we  tint!  in  the  phrase  in  question,  "  Who 
is  in  heaven,"  that  the  present  partciple  -»"  being," 
is  used  in  lieu  of  --.  "  is,"  viz.  'o^^UrZi^..^  ;  a  true 
translation  of  which  s  lould  be  '*  the  ens''  or  "  6c- 
iwg  in  heaven  ;"  and  as  the  nominative  case^*^ 
"  the  being,"  requires  a  verb  to  complete  the  sense, 
it  should  be  connected  with  the  nearest  verb 
i.«fif.«.»,  "  hath  ascended,"  no  other  verb  in  fact  ex- 
isting in  the  sentence. 

The  whole  verse    in  the  original   runs   thus  : 

ii,  i,  r^i^u^y  A  verbal  translation  of  the  above  would 
run  thus  :  "  And  no  one  hath  ascended  into  hea- 
ven, if  not  the  out  of  heaven  descender — the  Son 
of  man— the  being  in  heaven  ;"  which  words,  ar- 
ranged according  to  she    rules  of  English  gram- 
mar, shouhl  run   thus  :  "  And  no  one,  except  the 
descender  from  heaven,  the  Son  of  man,  the  being 
in  heaven,  hath  aj»cended  into  heaven."     In  this 
case,  the  presence  of  the  Son  in  heaven  must  be 
understood  as  rtftrrivg  to  the  time  of  His  ascent, 
and  not  to  that  of  his  addre>siiig  himself  |o  Nico- 
demus— an  exphtnation  which,  though  it  does  not 
serve    to  establish  the   omnipresence  of  the  Son 
urged   by  the   Editor,  ought  to  be  satisfactory  to 
an  impartial  mind.*     The  second   passage  which 

•*  See  Bishop  Muldleton's  *•  Doctrine  of  the  Greek  Article,"  Part 
I.  page  42,  Note  :  "  We  are  to  refer  the  time  of  the  participle  to  the 
time  of  the  act,  kc.  inipHed  in  the  verb  ;  for  past,  present,  and  futuie 
cannot  be  meant  otheovise  than  in  respect  to  that  act."    Leviticus, 

oh.  vii.  ver.  23  [33]  :  "O  9r^ea<pife** — ayrm  'icrmt  i  (ifa;i^iuv  oot^tof}     *  Xllt  Ot- 


179 

the  Editor  q.,otes  on  this  subject  is,  Matthew,  ch. 
x^„  ver.  2U :  "For  where  two  or  three  are  gath;reci 
together  ,n™y  name,  there  a,n  I  am  in  the  midst 
ot  them  1.  «n„t  evident  that  the  Saviour  meant 
here,  by  bemg  „,  the  mi.lst  of  two  or  three  of  his 
disciples,  IMS  guidance  to  ,hem  when  joined  in 
searching  for  the  truth,  without  preferrmg  any 
clam,  to  ubiquity  ?  We  find  similar  expressions  i^ 
the  bcnptures,  wherein  the  gui.lance  of  the  Pro- 

imply     he.r   presence.     Luke,   ch.  xvi.  ver.   29  ■ 

and    IZ      ^  ""?  '"•"'    '''^  '--  Moses 
and    the  Prophets ;  let   them  hear  them."     No 

one  wdl  suppose  that  this  expression  is  intended 
to  sigmfy  that  the  Jews  actually  had  Moses  and 

conlH  T      '  u     ^"■'°"  """"^  '^''"''  "••  '^-^  they 
could    hear   them  speak  in    the  literal  and  not 

xn  the     figurative  sense   of  the    words  ;  nor  can 

andthrP   1"'%"''    omnipresence   of   Moses 
and  the  Prophets  from  such  expressions. 

1  he  second  position  advanced  by  the  Reverend 

I;""*jf;"°">  *■"  "'"•  '"»"  be  the  right  shoulder."    Ch.  xiv  ver 
47.   »"S»>-»^<,..;r.,>«„,i„,j..T|,P  paling  (  ^"- XIV.  ver, 

his  clothes."     The,«   nl.„  .  /•■«"""§  (person)  shall  wash 

sent  Kith  respelt  to  .l-r  ?   Tk      "  !'  ""  "''""'  '"  "  '''"«  P^'" 
future  with    el  CMC  tl  7"^  "'""'"'""  ""^  '"-"  'but 

que„„y  find  .he  present  participle  ..sed  in  the  pas,  sense,  even  x'thou 
reference  to  the  time  of  the  ve.b.    John.  ch.  ix  ver  25  •  Jr       - 
^^r.,  "  Being  hlind.  no...,  see."  that  is,  "  Ttavin;  htnlrZir; 


180 

Editor  IS,  that  "Jesus  ascribes  to  himself  a  know- 
ledge   and  incomprehensibility  of   nature   equal 
to   that  of  God,   and   peculiar  to  God  alone?" 
and    in  attempting  to    substantiate    this   point, 
he    quotes    Matthew,    ch.    xi.   ver.  27,     "   No 
man   knoweth  the  Son,  but  the   Father ;  neither 
knoweth  any  man    the    Father,   save   the  Son, 
and    he    to  whomsoever     the  Son     will    reveal 
him."     Here  the   Editor   seems   to  rest  on   two 
grounds  ;  1st,  That  God  is  incomprehensible  to 
man  ;  2ndly,  That  incomprehensibility  of  nature 
is  peculiar  to  God  alone  : — whence  the  Reverend 
Editor  draws  his  inference,  that  Jesus,  knowing  the 
nature  of  God,  and  being  himself  possessed  of 
an   incomprehensible   nature,  is  equal  with  God. 
Now  I    should  wish  to  know  if  the  Editor,  by  the 
term     "  incomprehensible,"    understands  a  total 
impossibility  of  comprehension  in  any  degree,  or 
only  the  impossibility  of  attaining  to  a   perfect 
knowledge  of  God.     If  the  former,  I  must  be  un- 
der the  necessity  of  denying  such  a  total  incom- 
prehensibility of  the  Godhead  ;  for  the  very  pas- 
sage cited  by  the  Editor,  declares  God  to  be  com- 
preliensiblc  not  to  the  Son  alone,  but  also  to  every 
one  who  would  receive  revelation  from  the   Son  ; 
ami   in     this   case  the    latter    part  of   the    pas- 
sage, "  He  to  whomsoever  th<    Son  will   rereal 
him,'"  must   be  acknowledge  .    as    conveying  an 
exception  to   the  assertion    made  in    the   former 
part  of  the  sentence,"  Neither  knoweth  any  man 
the  Father,"  &c. 

We  find  also  the  following  passages  in  Joh?i. 


181 

clK  xiv.  vers  16,  17  :"  And  I  will  pray  the  Father, 
and  he  shall  g,ve  you  another  Comforter,  that  he 
may  ab.de  with  you  for  ever  :  even  the  Spirit  of 
truth  ;  whom  the  world  cannot  receive,  because  it 
seeth  h,m  not,  neither  knoweth  him  :  but  ye  know 
film  ;  -wherein  Jesus  ascribes  to  his  disciples  a 
knowledge  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Editor 
considers  one  of  the  persons  of  the  Godhead, 
possessed  of  the  same  nature  with  God.  But  if 

nlf,  !r  .""*^*"-^''»"^«  by  the  passage  he  has 
quoted,  the  mcomprehensibility  of  the  real  nature 
of  the  Godhead,  I  admit  the  position,  but  deny 
his  inference,  that  such  an   incomprehensibility 
proves  the  nature  of  the  object  to  be  divine,  as 
bemg  peculiar  to  God  alone  :  for  it  appears  evi- 
dent that  a  knowledge  of  the  real  nature  even  of  a 
common  leaf,  or  a  visible  star,  surpasses  human 
comprehension  ;  how  then  can  a  simple  assertion, 
setting  forth  the  incomprehensibility  of  an  object 
be   considered  as  establishing  its   identity   with" 
God  ?    In  Mark,  ch.  xiii.  ver-  32,  "  But  of  that  day 
and  that  hour  kn<,weth  no  man,  no,  not  the  angels 
which  are  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Fa- 
ther,   we  have  a  passage,  which,  though  it  affirms  in 
a  stronger  manner  an  ignorance  of  the  dm,  of  re- 
surrection than  that  already  quoted  does  of  God 
yet  will  not,  I  presume,  be  considered  by  any  one' 
as  conveying  the  slightest   insinuation    of  the  di- 
vme  nature  of  that  day  ;  though  time  is  a  com- 
mon object  of  adoration  amongst  idolaters.     In 
treating  of  this  point,  the  Editor  quotes  another 


.      \ 


182 

text,  Maitheic,  cli.  xi.  ver.  28,  "Come  unto  me,  all 
ye  that  labour  and  are  heavy  laden,  and  1  will  give 
you  rest ;"  wherein  Jesus  declares  his  power  of 
affording  rest,  which  the  Editor  considers  as  pecu- 
liar to  God.  All  the  prophets,  as  well  as  Jesus, 
were  from  time  to  time  sent  hy  the  Almighty  to 
afford  mental  rest  to  miinkind,  hy  imparting  to 
them  the  comforts  of  divint;  revelation  ;  and  by  so 
doing  they  only  fnltillcd  the  commission  given 
by  God  :  but  no  one  ever  su[)posed  that  in  so 
doing  they  establish(»d  claims  to  be  considered  in- 
carnations of  the  Divine  essence.  Proverbs,  ch. 
xxix.  ver.  17  :  "  Correct  thy  son,  and  he  shall  give 
thee  rest ;  yea,  he  shall  give  c^elii^ht  unto  thy 
soul."  Revelation  guides  us  to  a  sure  belief  that 
it  is  God  that  affords  peace  of  mind,  effects  cures 
of  the  body,  and  bestows  all  sorts  of  comforts  on 
his  creatures.  "  I  thank  thee,"  (says  Jesus,  Mat- 
thew,  ch.  xi.  ver.  25,)  "  (>  Father,  Lord  of  heaven 
and  earth,  because  thou  hast  hid  these  things  from 
the  wise  and  prudent,  and  hast  revealed  them  unto 
babes."  Both  our  perceptions,  indeed,  and  sacred 
authorities  point  out,  that  he  lavishes  all  these 
gifts  on  us  through  prophets,  physicians,  and  other 
physical  causes,  that  are  not  considered  by  any 
sect  as  of  a  divine  nature. 

The  third  position  is,  that  Jesus  exercised  in  an 
independent  manner,  the  prerogative  of  forgiving 
sins,  which  is  peculiar  to  God  alone  ;  and  the 
Reverend  Editor  cjuotes  the  passage,  Mark,  ch.ii. 
ver.  5,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee:"  and  the  9th 


18;5 

verse,  -  For  whether  is  it  easier  to  say,  Thy  sins 
be  for..ven  thee,  or  to  say,  Arise  and  wal[k  P" 
1  akin:;  those  texts  as  the  grounds  of  his  position, 
1 11  relore  beg  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Editoi' 
to  the  passage  almost  immediately  following    in 

power  of  forgivmg  s,ns,as  well  as  of  healing  men 

was  g,ven  by  the   Almighty:  ^ 

^ie  saw  ,t,  they  marvelled,  and  glorified  God, 
icho  had  given  such  power  unto  men:^  Does 
not  h,s  passage  convey  an  express  declaration, 
that  Jesus  was  as  much  dependent  on  God  in  ex 
erctsmg  the  power  of  forgiving  sins  and  healing 
the s,ck  as  the  prophets  who  came  forth  from  God 

power  of    forgivina  sins   in    tho   Qo  • 

.1  ^         ...»      '«   *'"^   *"    tne  feaviour,   were 

So7'2,     T""  '"'°  ^"'•="«^'' -"^^  through  the 

fcavour,  for  to  g.ve  repentance  to  Israel,  and  for- 
gnene..of  srn..     And    we  are  his  witnesses  of 
these  things,-  Ch.  xiii.  ver.  38  :<<  Be   irk:^^^^^ 
therefore,  men  and  brethren,  that   through  Ms 
~      n.ean.ng  the  Saviour,)  is  preachc^i   unto 
you  the  for^treness  of  ,uu."     I  know   not   how 
far  rehgious  zeal  in  the   breasts  of  many  of  the 
followers  of  Christ  may  excuse  them  in  e.Loach! 
>ng  upon  the  prerogatives  which  relation  and  rea- 
son ascnbe  to  the  Divine  Majesty  alone  ;  but  Je- 
«us  h.mself  clearly  avows,  that  the  power  of  for- 


/ 


184 

(riving  sins  had  its  source  and  origin  in  God  alone, 
as  appears  from  his  petitioning  the  Father  to 
forgive  those  that  were  guilty  of  bringing  the 
death  of  the  cross  upon  him,  the  greatest  of 
all  imaginable  crimes.  Luke,  ch.  xxiii.  ver.  34  : 
"  Father,  forgive  them,"  (says  Jesus,)  "  for  they 
know  not  what  they  do  ;"  and  from  iiis  directing 
all  those  that  followed  hiui  to  pray  the  Father 
alone  for  forgiveness  of  sins.  Lvkf,  ch.  xi.  ver 
4  :  "  And  forgive  us  our  sins."  Matthew,  ch.  vi. 
ver.  14:  "  If  ye  forgive  men  their  trespasses, 
your  heavenly  Fatiier  will  forgive  you." 

The  fourth  position  advanced  by  the  Editor  is, 
that  "  Almighty  power  is  also  claimed  by  .lesus  in 
the  most  untquivocal  maimer."     In  endeavouring 
to  demonstrate  this,  the  Editor  notices  three  pas- 
sages   of  John,  (ch.   v.  vers.    21— 23,)  "  As  the 
Father  raiseth  up  the  dead  and  quicken«'th  them, 
even  so  the  Son  quickeneth   whom  he  will.     For 
the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  committed 
all  judgment  unto  the  Son  :  that  all  men  should 
honour  the  Son,  even  as  they  honour  the   Father." 
A  candid  inquirer  after  truth  must,  1    think,  feel 
surprised  and  disappointed,  that  in  quoting  these 
texts,  the  Editor  should  have  overlooked  the  force 
of  the  words,  in  which  the  Son    declares  that  he 
hath  received   the  commission  to  judge  from  the 
Father :  "  For   the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  bul 
hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son."    I 
am  ready   to  admit,  indeed,  that,  taken  simply  as 
ihey  stand,  the  words,  "  As  the  Father  raiseth  up 


?; 


(85 
the  dead  and  quickeneth  them,  even  so  the  So,, 

^o,dd    honour  the   Son,  even  as  they   honour 
t^e  Father,    .„.gh,  very  readily  be  understood  as 
.mplyngan  assertion  of  equ.duy  with  the  Father. 
«ut  th,«  aflords  one  of  numerous  instances  of  the 
danger  of  resting    an  opinion   on  the   apparent 
meaning  of  the  words  of  insulated    passages  of 
Scr,pture,  w.thout  attention  to  the  context^  for  I 
am  convnced  that  no  unprejudiced  person  can  pe- 
ruse  the  ve,-ses  preceding  and  subsequent  to  those 
quoted  by  the  Editor,  without  feeling  that  a  mo  e 
exphct  d,savowal  of  equality  with  God  can  hard- 
ly be  expressed  by  language  than  that  which  thev 
conta,n.     I  „„,st  therefore  beg  permission  to  give 
ll^  entire  passage  in  this  place,  though  someptrts 
of  It    have  been  quoted  before  in  support  of  ar- 
guments already  discussed.     It  is  to  be  observed, 
tha   the  occasion  of  the  expressions  here  made  use 
of  by  Jesus     was  the  accusation   brought  against 

wm,  God     ;r  'r  '^  '-''  •"'^'^^  him^eir^-quj 
witli  God.  John,  ch.  V.  vers.  19—36  :  «  Then  an 

swered  Jesus,  andsai.J  unto  them,  Verily  verilv  I 
say  unto  you,  The  Son  candonothin/ofhiJif 
but  what  he  seeth  the  Father  do  :  for  what  thini' 
soever  he  doeth,  these  also  doeth  the  Son  likewise. 
For  the  Kather  loveth  the  Son,  and  showeth  him 
I'll  things    that  himself  doeth  :  and  he  will  show 
am  greater  works  than  these,  that  he  ma  v  marvel 
Kor  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quick- 
<'»e,h  them  ;  even  so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom 

27 


.1 


1/ 

I 


> 


)i 


I 


lie  will.     For  the  Father  jiulgetli  no  man,  but  liatii 
committed   all  judgment    unto  the   Son  ;  that  all 
men  should  honour  the  Son,  even  as  they  honour 
the  Father.     Fie  that  honoureth  not  the  Son,  ho- 
noureih  not  the  Father  who  hath  sent  him.  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  that  heareth  my  word, 
and  bdievffk  on  him  that  scitt  mc,  hath  everlasting 
life,  and  shall   not   come  into  condemnation  ;  but 
is  passed  from  death  unto  life.     Verily,  verily,   I 
say  unto  you.  The   hour  is  coming,  and  now  is, 
when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God  :  and  they   that  hear  shall  live.     For  as  the 
Father   hath  life  in   himself,  so  hath  he  given  to 
the  Son  to   have  life   in  himself ;  and  hath  gi ten 
him  authority  to  execute  judgment  also,  because 
he   is  the    Son  of  man.     Marvel  not  at  this  :  for 
the  hour  is  coming,    in  the  which   all  that  are  in 
the  ffrave   shall   hoar  his  voice,    and   shall  come 
forth  ;  they  that  have   done  good,  unto  the  resur- 
rection of  life  ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto 
the   resurrection    of  damnation.     /  can   of  mine 
ownself  do  nothing  :  as  I  hear,  I  judge  :  and  my 
iudo-ment  is  uist.  because  I  seek  not  mine  oicn  tcilly 
hut  the  will  oj  the  Father  who  hath  sent  me.     If  1 
bear  witness   of  myself,  my  wiincss  is  not  true. 
There  is  another  tlmtbeareth  witness  of  mc  ;  and 
I  know  tiiat  the  witness  which  he  witnesseth  of  me 
is  true.     Ye  sent  unto  John,  anH  he  i)are  witness 
unto  the  truth.     But  I  receive  not  testimony  from 
man  :  but  the>'e  things  I  say  that  ye   might  be  sa- 
ved.    IJe  Wiis  a  burning  and  a  shining  light  :  and 
ye  were  willing  for  a  season  to  rejoice  in  his  light. 


\ 


16/ 

But  1  have  greater  witness  than  that  of  John  •  for 
the  works  whicli  the    Father  hath  given  me  to 
finish,  the  same  works  that  I  do,  hear  witness  of 
me,  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me." 

It  would  have  been  strange  indeed,  had    Jesus, 
lu  repelling  the   accusation   of  blas,,h.^uiy.  which 
had  wrought  on  th,;  n,i„ds  of  the  Jews  so  far  that 
Ihey  sought  to  kill  him,  confirmed  their  assertion 
that  he  made  himself  equal  with  (lod,   and   thus 
prematurely  endangered  his  own  life ;  but  we  find 
that  so  far  from  being  further  incensed  by  the  ex- 
plaiiaticju  above  quoted,  they  seem  to  have  quietlv 
acquiesced  in  his  appeal  to  their  own  Scriptures 
that  the  Messiah  should  have  all  the  power  and 
authority  which  he  asserted  iho  Father  had  .rjven 
to  himself.     Ver.  4G :  "  I-'or  had  ye  believed  Moses 
ye  would  have  believe.l  me  ;  for  he  wrote  of  me." 
The  only  text  in  the  writings  of  Moses  that  refers 
to  the  nature  of  the  Messiah,  is  that  of  Deuterono- 
my, ch.  xviii.  vers.   15  and  18,  quoted  by  8t.  P.-ter, 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  ch.  iii.  ver.  2i,  and  by 
St.  Stephen,  ch.  vii.  ver.  37,  Moses  said  to  the  clul- 
drenof  Israel,  "The  Lord  thy  God  will  raiseupunto 
thee  a  Prophet  from  the  mi.lst  of  thee,  of  thy  bre- 
thren, like  unto  me  :  unt„  him  ve  shall  hearken." 
The  words  which   the  Lord  ad.lress(ul  to   Moses 
were  exactly  of  the  same  import :  "  I  wdl  raise 
them  up  a  Prophet  from  among  their  bretliren 
like  unto  thee;'  &c.     It  was,  no  doubt,  to  this  re- 
markable passage  that  Jesus  referred,  and  nothino- 
can  more  distinctly  prove  the  light  in  which  he 


(   I 

it 


h 


I 


m 


it" 


Ii 


I' 


188 

wished  to  bo  considered,   namely,  that  of  a  Mes- 
senger or   Prophet  of  God.     But  this  is  not  the 
only  instance  in  which  Jesus  entirely  disclaims  the 
attribute  of  omnipotence.     On  many  other  parti- 
cular  occasions  he  declares,  in  the  strongest  lan- 
guage, his  want  of  almighty  power,   and  his  con- 
stant need  of  divine  influence.      Alatthcw,  ch.  xx. 
ver.  23  :  "  And  he  sailh  unto  them,  ye  shall  drink 
indeed  of  my  cup,  and  be  baptised  with  the  bap- 
tism that  1  am    baptised  with  :  but  to   sit   on  my 
right  hand,  and  on  my  left,  «s  ;/(;/  inuu  toiriri  ;  but 
it  shall  be  given  to  them  for  whom  it  is  prepared 
of  my  Father."     CMi.  xii.  ver.  28  :  **  But  if  1  cast 
out  i]c\\U  by  the  spirit  of  God,  then  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  come  unto  you."     Ch.    xxvi.  ver.  39  : 
('  And  he  went  a  little  further,  and  fell  on  his  face, 
and  prayed,  saying,  O  my  Father,  if  it  be  possi- 
ble, let  this  cup  pass  from  me  :  nevertheless,   not 
as  I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt."     Ver.  42  :  "  He  went 
away  again  the  second  time,  and  prayed,  saying,  O 
my  Father,  if  this  cup   may  not  pass  away  from 
me,  except  I  drink  it,  thy  will  be  done."     Lnke, 
ch.  xxii.  ver.  32  :  "  But  1  have  prayed  for  thee,  that 
thy  faith  fail  not,"  ifec.     Jo/tn,   ch.  xii.    ver.  27  : 
"  Father,  save  m(^  from  this  hour."     Whosoever 
honours  God,  cannot  I  presume,  consistently  re- 
fuse  to   honour   his  Prophet,  whom   he  dignified 
with  the  name  of  "  ^on  of  God  ;"  ;ind  ns  he  ho- 
noursGn.l.hc  will  nl^ohonour  that  Prophet,  though 
he    be  wal  riware  of  the  distinction  between  the 
Almighty  and  his  chosen  Son.     The  honour  paid 
to  the  Prophet  may  in  this  sense  be   fairly  consi- 


d^^red  the  test  of  the  real  degree  of  respect  enter- 

^er    40,      He  that  recetveth  you,   receiveth  me  ; 
and  ».e  that  receiveth  me,  receiveth  him  that  sent 
me.      The  obvious  meaning  of  which  words  is,  As 
far  as  ^en    ..ten  to  your  instructions,  they  listen 
to  mine,  and  ,n  so  far  th.y  receive  the  command- 
mentsof  Go<l  who  hath  ...t  me.   Prejudice  alone 
CHiM,       think,  mfer  from  such  expressions,   that 
those  who  received  the  Apostles  were  literally  re- 
^^•'vmg  God    hnnsdf  under  their  form  and  ;ub. 
stance.  Equally  demonstrative  of  prejudice  I  con- 
ceive, wouhl  it  be  to  deduce  the  identity  or  equali- 
ty of  the   Father  and  the  Son  from  the  llllowin^ 
passage    John,  ch.   v.    ver.  23 :  -That   all  men 
should  honour  the  Son,  even  as   they  honour  the 
1  ather.    lie  that  honoureth  not  the  Son,  honoureth 
not  the  Father  who  hath  sent  him."     For  in  this 
very  passage  the  Son  i«   represented  as  the  Mes- 
senger of  the  Father,  and  for  that  reason  onlv  en- 
titled to  honour.     That  the  preposition  "  as"  im- 
plieshere,asin  many  other  |>laces,  likeness  in  na- 
tureand  <,ual,ty,  and  not  in  exact  de^rree  of  honour 
is    illustrated    by  its  obvious   meaning  in  the  last 
verse  of  Maffhn,  v.,  "  Be  ye  therefore   perfect 
even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect  ;"  for  by 
tiiese  words  no  one  can  conceive,  that  equality  in 
degree  of  perfection  between    God  and  the  disci- 
ples IS  intended  to  be  enjoined. 

The  fifth  position  is,  that  his  heavenly  Father 
had  committed  to  Jesus,  the  final  judgment  of  all 


i, 


/ 


A 


.«'/ 


H)(i 

who  have  lived  since  ihe  crealioii.  1  readily  admit 
the  correctness  of  this  [)()sitii)n,  and  consider  the 
fact  asconiirining  the  opinion  njaintnined  by  inc, 
and  by  numerous  other  followers  of  Christ,  as  to 
the  Son's  total  dependenccj  on  the  commission  of 
God  for  his  power  in  administering  such  judg- 
ment. I  agree  also  with  the  lieverend  Editor,  in 
esteeming  the  nnture  of  this  ofllce  most  important; 
and  that  nothing  but  the  gift  of  supernatural  wis- 
dom can  qualify  a  being  to  judge  the  conduct  of 
thousands  of  millions  of  individuals,  living  at  dif- 
ferent times  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  to 
the  day  of  resurrection.  It  is  however  perfectly  con- 
sistent with  the  omnipotence  and  wisdom  of  (iod, 
who  is  declared  by  revelation  to  be  "  able  of  these 
stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abraham,"  ('^'^^' 
ihew,  ch.  iii.  ver.  9,)  and  with  whom  all  things  are 
possible,  fy/w/.6',ch.  i.  ver.  o7,)  to  bestow  wisdom 
equal  to  the  important  nature  of  this  oftice  on  the 
first-born  of  every  creature,  whom  he  has  anointed 
and  exalted  even  above  his  angels.  But  the  Editor 
goes  much  further  than  I  am  willing  to  follow  him, 
in  concluding  the  omniscit;uce  of  the  Son, from  the 
circumstance  of  his  distributing  final  judgment  ; 
since  Jesus  not  oidy  «lisclainnMl  that  attribute,  but 
even  expressly  ;ivovved  thai  Ik-  received  his  (jualili- 
cations  for  exercising  judgment  from  (iod.  With 
respect  to  his  declaiming  omnifecience,  see  il/a//:,cli. 

xiii.  ver.  3'2  :  **  But  of  that  day  and  that  hour  know- 
ethno  man,  no,  not  the  angels  which  are  in  heaven, 
neither  the  Son,  but  th(^  Father."  Omniscience,  as 
the  Editor  must  be  well  aware,  has  no  limit  ;   but 


liero  Jesus  expressly  declares,  that  he  is  ignorant 
ot  th^-  (lay  appointed  by  the  Father  for  the  resur- 
rection and  judgment.      What  words  can  be  more 
expressly  declaratory  than   these  of  the  finite  na- 
ture of  the  knowledge  granted  to  Jesus,  however 
US  extent  may  actually  surpass  our  limited  capaci- 
ty .      As  a  proof  that  his  judicial  authority  is  deri- 
ved from  God,  see  Join:,  chap.  v.  vers.  26  and  27  : 
For  as  the  Father  hath   life  in  himself,  so  hath 
he^i^en  to  the  Son   to  have  life  in  himself;  and 
hath    given    him,    authority  to    execute    iudcr- 
ment  also."     30:  <<\  can   of  mine   own    self  do 
nothing:  as  I  hear,  [judge:  and  my  judgment  is 
just;  because  I  seek  not  mine  own  will,  but  the 
will  of  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me."    Is  it  pos- 
^sible  to  misiinderstanrl  the  assertion  contained  in 
these  words,  that  both  the  a.ithority  and  the  ability 
to  judge  are  gifts  bestowed  on  the  Son  by  the  om- 
nipotent Fatlier? 

The  sixth   position  is,  that  in  several  instances 
Jesus  accepted  worship  <^i\u^,  to  no  man,  but  to  God 
alone;"   and  instances  of   his    receiving   worship 
from  a  blind  man,  a  h.por,  from  mariners,  and  from 
his   disciph^s,  an^   adduced  from    the  evangelical 
writings.     Every  one  must  admit  tliti   the  word 
"worship,"  both  in  common  acceptation  and  in  the 
Scriptural  writings,  is  used  sometimes  as  implying 
an   external   mark  of  religious  reverence  paid  to 
(iod,  and  at  other  times,  as  signifying  merely  the 
token  of  civil  respect  due  to  superiors;  and  that 
concurrent  circumstances  in  every  instance  deter- 
mine the  real  sense  in  whicfi  x]v,  v^rd  shoMJd  h^^ 


i, 


n 


11 


,i1 


•j 


i 


/ 


I' 


19J 

taken.  Among  the  Prophets  of  (jod,  Jesus  was 
not  the  only  one  that  permitted  himself  to  be  wor- 
shipped, as  we  find  Daniel  the  Prophet  allowing 
himself  such  worship.  Daniel,  eh.  ii.  ver.  46: 
"Then  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar  fell  upon  his 
face,  and  worshipped  Daniel."  Daniel,  like  Je- 
sus, neither  rebuked  the  man  who  worshipped 
him,  nor  did  he  feel  indignant  at  such  a  tribute  of 
respect;  yet  we  cannot  find  any  subsequent  asser- 
tion that  he  had  oflfended  God  by  suffering  him- 
self to  be  the  object  of  the  king's  worship  in  this 
instance.  Besides,  Jesus  himself  uses  the  word 
worship  in  the  latter  sense,  (1  mean  that  of  civil 
reverence,)  in  one  of  the  evangelical  parables, 
where  he  represents  a  servant  as  worshipping  his 
master.  Matthnc,  ch.  xviii.  ver.  20:  "The  ser- 
vant therefore  fell  down  and  worshipped  him." 
From  the  circumstance  of  Jesus  positively  com- 
manding human  beings  to  worship  God  alone  in 
spirit,  and  not  in  any  form  or  shape,  either  human 
or  angelic;  as  John,  ch.  iv.  ver.  24  :  "God  is  a 
Spirit;  and  they  that  worship  him  must  worship 
him  in  spirit  and  in  truth  ;"  Mattheic,  ch.  iv.  ver. 
10:  "  Thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God,  and 
him  onlv  shalt  thou  serve  ;"  and  from  the  cir- 
cumstance  of  his  rebuking  the  man  who  called 
him  "  good  master,"  on  the  ground  that  the  term 
"  wood"  sliould  be  peculiarly  applied  to  God  alone, 
(Matt.  ch.  xix.  ver.  17,)  we  necessarily  conclude 
that  Jesus  accepted  worship  only  as  a  mark  of  hu- 
man respect  and  acknowledgment  of  gratitude. 


\ 


193 

Let  us  moreover  ascertain  from  the  context,  the 
sentiments  which  the  blind  man,  the  leper,  the  ma- 
nners,   and    the   disciples  of  Jesus,    entertained 
of  his  nature  ;  and  we  can  no  longer  hesitate  to 
believe,  that  they  meant  by   the  worship   they  of- 
fered, only  ihe  manifestation  of  their  reverence  for- 
him,  as  a  superior  indeed,   yet  still  as  a  created 
bemg.     The  question  is,  Did  those  that  oflered 
worship  to  Jesus  evince  that  they  believed  him  to 
be  God,  or  one  of  the  three  persons  nf  ihe  God- 
hea<l,  and  e(|ual  to  God  ?  .Nothing  of  ih-  kind— 
the  blind  man,  after  his  cure,  spoke  of  Jesus  as  a 
prophet,   and  a  righteous  man,  and  believed  him 
when  he  said  he  was  the  Son  of  God.    John,  ch. 
IX.   ver.   31  :  "  Now  we  know"  (says   the  blind 
man)  "  that  God  heareth  not  sinners  :  but  if  any 
man  be  a  worshipper  of  God,  and  doeth  his  will 
hm.  he  heareth."  Ver.  33  :  "If  this  man  were  not 
of  God,  he  could  do  nothing."     And  in  answer  to 
the  question  of  Jesus,  '•  Dost  thou  believe  on  the 
Son    of  God  ?"    he  answers,  "  Lord,  I   believe. 
And  he  worshipped  him."  ver.  38.     The  unclean 
spirit  which  is  said  in  Mark  to  have  worshipped 
Jesus,  «  Cried  with  a  loud  voice,  and  said,    What 
have  I  to  do  with   thee,  Jesus,  thou  Son  of  the 
most  high  God  ?  I  adjure  thee  by  God,  that  thou 
torment  me  not."     Mark,  ch.  v.  ver.  7.     This  ad- 
juration would  have   been  absurd  if  Jesus  were 
himself  addressed  as  God  ;  and   clearly  shows, 
that  the  worship  offered,  was  to  deprecate  the' 
power  of  a  being  whose  nature  was  subordinate 

28 


40 


{ 

V' 


'f        ! 


I 


>: 


■Ji;,-* 


ii 


i  I 


{    • 


\ 


P 


-_>.- 


n 


194 

to  that  of  Gofl,  by  vvliose  name  he  was  adjured. 
The  leper,  too,   glorified  God,  while  to  Jesus  he 
gave  only  thanks  for  being  the  instrument  of  his 
cure.     Luke,  ch.  xvii.  vers.  15,  16  :  "  And  one  of 
them,    when  he  saw  that  he  was  healed,   turned 
ba<*k,  m\  with  a  h)ud  voice  glorified  God,  and  fell 
down  on  his  face  at  liis  feet,  giving  him  fhariks.^' 
The  mariners  who  worshipped  Jesus,  declared  at 
the  same  instant,  **  Of  a  truth  thou  art  the  Son  of 
God."    Matthew,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  33.    The  woman  of 
Canaan,  whoisalso  stated  in  3faf«Aci/?,  ch.xv.  ver. 
25,  to  have  worshipped  Jesus,  addressed  him,  ver, 
22,  as  "  the  son  of  David,''  by   which   term  she 
certainly  wouM  not  have  designated  a  being  whom 
she  worshipped  as  God.     Peter,  the  most  celebra- 
ted of  his  disciples,  showed  his  faith  in  acknow- 
lef'ing  Jesus  merely    as  the  Christ,  or  in    other 
words  with  the  same  exact  sense,  the  anointed  of 
God— which  is  certainly  far  from  implying  '*  very 
God."    Mark,  ch.  viii.  29    Even  after  crucifixion, 
we  find  the  disciples  conversing  of  Jesus  only  as 
"  a  prophet,    niijzhty  in  deed  and  in  word   before 
God  and  all  the  people."    Luke,c\\.\\\\.  ver.  19. 
It  was  Jesus  himself  risen  from   the  dead  whom 
they  addressed,  yet  throughout  the  remainder  of 
the  chapter,  which  concludes  with  the  account  of 
his  being  carried  up  to  heaven,  they  are  only  fur- 
ther  taught  that  this   prophet  was  the  promised 
Messiah,  but  no  means  that  it  was  their  duty  to 
worship  him  as  God.  Peter,  in  the  name  of  all  the 
disciples,  declares,  John,  ch.  vi.  ver.  60,"  We  be- 


i 


I 


l9/> 

lieve  and  are  sure  that  thou  art  [that]  Christ,  the 
son  of  the  living  God."  And  as  already  observed, 
the  disciple  John  declares,  that  the  object  of  the 
gospel  is,  ^*  that  it  may  be  believed  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  John,  ch.  xx.  ver. 
31.  When  the  leper  prayed  to  Jesus  for  cure,  he 
addressed  him  only  with  the  term  k.^...  (Matthew, 
ch.  viii.  ver.  2,  which  in  Greek  is  used  as  synony- 
mous  to  Lord  or  xMaster,  and  often  applied  to  su- 
perior  persons. 

Every   Christian   is   morally  bound   to  evince 
obedience  to  the  commandments   of  Jesus,  and 
exert  himself  to  follow  his  example.     It  behooves 
us,   therefore,   to   ascertain  what  his  command- 
ments are  with  regard  to  the  object  of  sacred  wor- 
ship and  prayer,  and  in  what  manner  he  him.self 
performed    those  solemn  religious  duties      The 
very  act  of  prayer  indeed  implies  an  acknowledg- 
ment  of    inferiority   to    the    being   adored  ;  but 
though  Trinitarians  affirm  that  such  d  -votion  was 
paid  by  Jesus  only  in  his  human  capacity,  his  form 
of  prayer  ought  still  to  be  sufficient  to  guide  human 
creatures  as  to  the  Being  to  whom   th^^r  prayers 
should  be  addressed.     Let  us  examines  therelbre, 
whether  Jesus  in  hisacknowIedg( d  human  capacity 
ever  oflTered  worship  or  prayer  to  what  Trinitarians 
term  the  second  or  third   person  of  the  Godhead, 
or  once  directed  his  followers  to  worship  or  pray- 
to  either  of  them.     But  so  far  from  findinjr  a  sin- 
gle direction   of  the  kind,  we  observe  on  the  con- 
trary, that  Jesus  strictly  enjoins  us  to  worship  the 


{ 


w 


19G 

Father  alone  in  that  form  of  prayer  which  he  of- 
fered for  our  jTuiflance.     Matihrw,  ch.  vi.  ver.  9  : 
"  After  this  manner  therefore  pray  ye,  Ovr  Father 
which  art  in  heaven,"  &c.     **  Pray  to  /////  F  titer 
which  is  in  secret  :  and  /////  Father,  whi.  h  seeth 
in  secret,  sliall  reward  thee  openly."     In  the  same 
way,    when    the   Saviour    himself  prays,    he   ad- 
dresses  the    Father  alone.      Matthcio,    ch.   xvix. 
ver.  53  :  "Thinkest  thou,"  says  Jesus  to  Peter,"  that 
I  cannot  now  pray  to  mf/  Fathtr  ?"  Johfiy  ch.  xvi. 
ver.  26:  *M  \\\\\  pray  the  Father  for  you."  Ltfke,ch. 
xxii.  ver.  41,  42  :  "And  he  (the  Saviour)  was  with- 
drawn from  them  about  a  stone's  cast,  and  kneeled 
down,  and  prayed,  saying,  Father,  if  thou  be  wil- 
ling, remove  this  cup  from  me."     Mark,  ch.  xiv. 
vers.  35,  36  :  "  And  fell  on  the  ground,  and  pray- 
ed, that  if  it  were   possible  the   hour   might  pass 
from  him.     And  he  said,  Abba,  Father,  all  things 
are  possible  unto  thee."  Luke,  ch.  vi.  ver.  12 :  "  He 
went  out  unto  a  mountain  to  pray,  and  continued 
all  night  in  prayer  to  God,''     Luke,  ch.  x.  ver. 
21:  "In   that  hour  Jesus  rejoiced  in   .-pirit,   and 
said,  I  thank  thee,  O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and 
earth."     John,  ch.  xi.  ver.  41  :   "  And    esus  lifted 
up  his  eyes,    and   said,   Father,  I    thank  ihee  that 
thou    ha.st   heard   me."     Matthnc,    ch    xxvu.  ver. 
46:  ''  My  dod,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken 
me  ?"     John,   ch.    iv.   ver.  22  :  "  Ye  worship  ye 
know  not  what  ;  we  know  what  we  worship."   No 
creed  drawn  up  by   men,  nor   opinion  (entertained 
by  any  sect,  can  by  an  unbiassed  searcher  after  the' 


A 


A 


197 

•rue  doctrines  of  Christianity,  be  suflered  to  set,' 
aside  the  express  authority  and  constant  example 
ot  the  gracious  author  of  this  religion. 

The  last  position  is,  that  Jesus  associated  his 
own  name  with  that  of  God  in  the  rite  of  bap- 
tism  mtended  to  remain  in  force  to  the  end  of  the 
world,  and  ordaine.l  by  the  passage,  Matthew,  ch. 
xxvn,.ver.    19,  «  Go   ye  and   teach    all  nations, 
baptus,,^  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  bon,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  A  profession 
ot  belief  ,n  God  is  uncjuestionably  common  to  all 
the  religions  supposed  to  have  been  founded  upon 
the  authority  of  the  Old  Testament ;  but  each  is 
distinguished  from  the  other  by  a  public  profession 
of  faith  m  their  respective  founders,  expressing  such 
a  profession  in  a  language  that  may  clearly  exhibit 
the  inferior  nature  of  those  founders  to  the  Divine 
iicing,  of  whom  they  declare  themselves  the  messen- 
gers. Thissystemhas  been  carried  on  from  the  first 
and  was  no  doubt  intended  to  serve  as  a  perpetual 
distinguishing   mark  of  faith.     The  Jews  claim 
that  they  have  revelation,  rendering  a  belief  not 
in  God  alone,  but  in  Moses  also,  incumbent  upon 
them.    Exodus,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  31  :  "  'Jhe   people 
feared  th..  Lord,    and  b.lieved  the  Lord,  and   his 
servant  Moses."     But  the  term  «  his  servant  Mo- 
ses,    in  this  passage,  suffices  to  prove  the  subor- 
dination of  Moses,  though  declared,  equally  with 
God,  to  be  an  object  of  their  belief.     In  like  man- 
ner   M„hiiininu.laiKs,   in  the  first  acknowledgment 
of  that  system  of  religion,  are  directed  to  profesv 


I 


/.^ 


1  * 


pp' 


198 

faith  in  God,  and  also  in  Mohummud,  his  messen- 
ger, in  the  following  form  :  "  There  is  no  God  ex- 
cept the  true  God,  Mohummud  is  his  messenger." 
The  term  "  his  messenger"  removes  every  doubt 
of  Mohummud's  identity  or  equality  with  God  ; 
so  the  epithet    *  Son"  found  in  the  passage,  "  Bap- 
tising them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,"  &c.  ought  to  be  understood  and  admitted 
by  every  one  as  expressing  the  created  nature  of 
Christ,  though  the  most  highly  exalted  among  all 
creatures.     If  baptism  were  administered  to  one 
embracing  Christianity  in  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  would  thereby  no  more  be- 
come enrolled  as  a  Christian,   than  as  a  Jew  or  as 
a  Mohummudan ;  for  both  of  them,  in  common 
with  Christians,  would  readily  submit  to  be  bapti- 
zed in  the  name  of  God  and  his   prevailing  influ- 
ence over  the  universe.  But  as  Christianity  requires 
peculiarly  a  faith  in  Jesus,  as  the  promised  Mes- 
siah, the  gracious  Saviour  enjoins  baptism  in  the 
name  of  the  Sim   also,  so    as  to  distinguish   his 
happy  followers  from  the  Jews  and  the  rest  of  the 
people.     A  mere  association  of  names  in  divine 
commandments  therefore  never  can  be  considered 
as  tending  to  prove  identity  or  equality  between 
the  subjects  of  those  names  : — sue  h  junction  of 
names  is  found  frequently    in   the    Sacred    Wri- 
tings without  establishing  unity  among  the  persons 
whom  those  names  imply. 

The  Editor  quotes  the  following  passage  :  Mat- 
thew, ch.  xxviii.  ver.  J8  :  "  All  power  in  heaven 


199 

and  earth  is  delivered  unto  me,"  recommending  it 
as  a  sure  proof  of  the  deity  of  Jesus.  I  regret 
very  lauch  that  the  force  of  the  expression  "  is 
delivered  unto  me,"  found  in  this  passage,  should 
have  escaped  the  discerning  notice  of  the  Reve- 
rend Editor.  Does  not  the  term  "  delivered"  show 
evidently  an  entire  dependence  of  Jesus  upon  the 
Being  who  has  committed  to  him  such  power  ? 
Is  it  consistent  with  the  nature  of  an  omnipotent 
God  to  exercise  power  delivered  to  him  by  another 
being,  or  to  confess  that  the  power  he  possesses 
has  been  received  by  him  from  another  ? 

As  to  the  question  of  the  Editor,  "  Did  Mohum- 
mud, arrogant  as  he  was,  ever  make  such  a  decla- 
ration as   Jesus   did,  namely,   that  '  I  am    with 
you  always  even  to  the  end  of  rhe  world  ?' "    I  will 
not  renew  the  subject,  as  it  has  been  already  dis^ 
cussed  in  examining  the  first  position.     I  only  en- 
treat the  attention   of  the  editor  to  the  following 
assertions  of  Mohummud,   known  to   almost    all 
Moossulmans  who    have  the  least  knowledge  of 
their  own  religion  :  -  Truly  the  great  and  glorious 
God  raised  me  as  mercij  and  guidance  to  worlds:' 
"  I  was  the  first  of  all  Prophets  in  creation,  and 
the  last  in  appearance."     "  I  was  a  Prophet  when 
Adam   was  in   earth  and   water."         <*  I  am  the 
Lord  of  those  that  were  sent  God.     This  is  no 
boast  to  me."    "  My  shadow  is  on  the   head  only 
of  my  followers."  -  He  who  has  seen  me,  has  seen 
God."     "  He  who  has   obeyed  me,  has   obeyed 


J 


10  ' 


\ 


I 


1  < 


"200 


God  :  and  he  who  has  sinned  against  me,  has  sin- 
ned against  God." 

It  is  however  fortunate    for  Moosulmans,  that 
from   want  of  familiarity   and  intimate  connex- 
ion between   the    primitive    Mohummudans    and 
their  contemporary  heathens,  the  doctrines  of  Mo- 
notheism taught  by  Mohunimud,  and   entertained 
by  his  followers,  have  not  been  corrupted  by  poly- 
theistical    notions  of  Pagans,  nor  have  heathen 
modes  of  worship  or  festivals  been    introduced 
among  Moosulmans   of  Arabia  and  Turkey  as  a 
part  of  their  religion.     Besides,   metaphorical  ex- 
pressions haviiiit  been  very  common  among  Ori- 
ental nations,  Mohummudans  could  not  fail  to  un- 
derstand them  in    their  proper  sense,   although 
these  expressions  may  throw  great  difficulty  in  the 
way  of  a  European  Commentator,  even  of  pro- 
found learning. 


\ 


'201 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Inquiry  into  the  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement. 

All  the  texts  collected  by  the  Reverend  Editor 
in  his  review  from  the  authority  of  the  divine 
Teacher,  m  favour  of  the  second  important  doc 
trine  of  the  cross,  implying  the  vicarious  sacrifice 
of  Jesus  as  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of  mankind, 
are  as  follow  :  «  I  am  the  living  bread  which 
came  down  from  heaven  :  if  any  man  eat  of  this 
bread  he  shall  live  for  ever."  His  giving  his 
flesh  for  the  life  of  the  world."  "  f  la/down  my 

togivehis  hfe  a  ransom  for  many."  Is  any  one 
of  these  passages.  I  would  ask,  in  the  shape  of  an 
explicit  commandment,   or  are  they  more  than  a 

ZZTTT  '^''''''  '■^^"''•'"^  figurative  inter- 
pretation ?  For   It  IS  obvious  that  an   attempt  to 
ake  them  in  their  direct  sense,  especially  the  first. 
(    I  am  the  livmg  bread  ;-if  any  man  eat  of  this." 
<fcc.)  would  amount  to  gross  absurdity.     Do  thev 
reasonably  convey  any  thing  more  than  the  idea 
hat  Jesus  was  invested  with  a  divine  commission' 
to  deliver  instructions  leading  to  eternal  beati- 
tude, which  whosoever  should  receive  should  live 
or  ever?    And  that  the   Saviour,  foreseeing  that 
the  imparting  of  those  instructions  would,  byexci- 

29 


i  u 


i 


i ' 


^. 


Hii 


•/ 


J02 

ting  the  anger  and   enmity  ot*  the  superstitious 
Jews,  cause  his  lite  to  he  destroyed,  yet  hesitated 
not  to  persevere  in  their  promulgation  ;  as  if  a 
king,  who  hazards  his  life  to  procure  freedom  and 
peace  for  his  subjects,   were  to  address  himself  to 
them,  saying,  "  I  lay  down  my  life  for  you."   This 
interpretation  is  fully  confirmed  by  the  following 
passages.     Luke,  ch.  iv.  ver.  43  :  "  And  he  said 
unto  them,   I  must  preach  the  kingdom  of  God  to 
other  cities  also;  for  therefore  am  I  sent:'     Ch. 
ii.  vers.  47—49  :  '*  And  all  that  heard   him  were 
astonished   at    his   understanding  and     answers- 
And  when  th(  y   (his  parents)  saw  him,  they  were 
amazed  :  and   his   mother  said   unto    him,   Son, 
why  hast  thou    thus  dealt  with  us  ?  Behold,  thy 
father  and   I  have  soughi  ^h^c   sorrowing.     And 
he  said  unto  them.  How  is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ? 
wist  ye  not  that  7  mvfit  he  nhovt  wy  Father's  bv- 
sineJsi  ?"  Wherein  .lesus  declares,  that  the  sole  ob- 
iect  of  his  mission  was  to  preach  and  impart  di- 
vine instructions.     Again,  after  having  instructed 
his  disciples  in  all  the  divine  law  and  will,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  following  text,  *^  For  I  have  given 
unto  them  the  words  whirh  thou  gavest  me  ;  and 
the)  have  received  them,  and  have   known  sorely 
that  I  came  out  from  tliee,  and  they  have  believed 
that   thou  didst  send   me,"     (John,  ch.  xvii.  ver. 
8,)  Jesus  in   his  conununir»n   with  God  manifests 
that  he  had  completed  the  object  of  his  mission 
by  imparting  divine  comm  'ndments  to  mankind, 
"  I  have  glorified  thee  on  the  earth,  I  hate  finish- 


\ 


}  ^ 


'{ 


ed  the  work  which  thou  gavest  me  to  do,^'  Had 
his  death  on  the  cross  been  the  work,  or  pan  of 
the  work,  for  the  performance  of  which  Jesus 
was  sent  into  this  world,  he  as  the  founder  of  truth 
would  not  have  declared  himself  to  have  finished 
that  work  prior  to  his  death. 

That  Jesus   should  ride  on  a  colt,   should  re- 
ceive an  offer  of  vinegar  to  drink,  and  should  be 
wounded  with  a  spear  after  he  had  delivered  up 
the  ghost,  as  well  as  his  death  on  the  cross,  were 
events  prophesied  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  con- 
sequently   these    were   fulfilled   by  Jesus.     Vide 
Luke,  ch.    xxiv.   vers.   26  and  27  :  "  Ought  not 
Christ  to  have  suffered  these  things,  and  to  enter 
into  his  glory  ?     And  beginning  at  Moses  and  all 
the  Prophets,  he  expounded  unto  them   in  all  the 
scriptures  the  things  concerning  himself."     But 
we  are  unhappily  at  a  loss  to  discover  any  other 
design  in  each  of  these  events,  which  happened  to 
Jesus  before  his   ascent  to    heaven.     I  am  there- 
fore sorry  that  I  must  plead  my  inability  to  make 
a  satisfactory  reply  to  the  question  of  the  Editor, 
"  Had  ever  Jesus  transgressed  his  heavenly  Fa- 
ther's will,  that  he  underwent  such  afflictions."     I 
can  only  say,  that  we  fiufl  in  the  Scriptures  that 
several  other  Prophets  in  common  with  Jesus  suf- 
fered great  afflictions,   and  some  even  death,  as 
predicted.     But  I  know  not  whether  those  afflic- 
tions were  the  consequences  of  the  sins  commit- 
ted by  them  or  by  their  parents,  or  whether  these 
distresses  were  experienced  by  them  through  somo 
divine  purpose  tmknown  to  us  :  as  some  scriptural 


j 


I 


\ 


/ 


li 


1/ 


204 

authorities  show  beyond  doubt,  that  man  may  be 
made   liahhi  to  sutlerings   for  some   secret  divine 
purpose,  without  his  or  his  parents  having  perpe- 
trated any  remarkabU^  crime.      {John,  ch.  ix.  ver. 
3:  *' Jesus  ail 'Wered,   Neither  hath  this  man  sin- 
ned nor  liis   parents  ;  but  that  the  works  of  God 
shouhl    be  made   manifest  in  liim.")     The  latter 
alternative   (namely,    tiiat  the  righteous  Prophets 
suffered  afflictions  and  even  death  for  some  divine 
purpose,  known  thoroughly   to  God  alone)  seems 
more  consistent  with  the   contents  of  the  sacred 
writings,  such  as  follow  :  Mark,  ch.  xiii.  vers.  1 — 
9  :  ''  And  he  began  to  speak  unto  them  by  para- 
bles.    A  certain  man  planted  a  vineyard,  and  set 
a  hedge  about  it,  and  digged  a  place  for  the  wine 
fat,  and   built  a   tower,  and  let  it  out  to  husband- 
men, and   went   into  a  far  country.     And  at   the 
season  he  sent  to  the  husbandmen  a  servant,  that 
he   might    receivi;    from   the   husbandmen  of  the 
fruit  of  the  vineyard      An«l  they  caught  him,  and 
beat  him,  and  sent  him  away  empty.      And  again 
he  sent    unto  them   another  servant  ;  and  at  him 
thev  cast   stones,  and   wounded  him  in  the   head, 
and   sent  him    away  shamefully    handled.     And 
again  he  sent  another  ;  and  him  they  killed,  and 
many  others  ;  beating    some,    and   killing  some. 
Having  yet  therefore  one  son,  his  well-beloved, 
he  sent  him  also  last  unto  them,  saying,  They  will 
reverenre  my  son.     But  these    husbandmen  said 
among  themselves,  This  is  the  heir  ;  come  let  us 
kill  him,  and  the  inheritance  shall  be  ours.     And 
they  took  him,  and  killed  him,  and  cast  him  out  of 


\ 


V^ 


205 

the  vineyard.    What  shall  therefore  the  lord  of  the 
vineyard  do  ?  He   will  come  and  destroy  the  hus- 
bandmen, and  will  give  the  vineyard  unto  others." 
John,  ch.  XV.  vers.  21,  22  :  "  But  all  these  things 
will  they  do  unto  you  for  my  name's  sake,   because 
they  know  not  him  that  sent  me.     Jf  I   had  not 
come   and  spoken   unto  them,    they  had  not  had 
sm:  but  now  they   have  no  cloke  for  their  sin." 
This  parable  and  these  passages  give  countenance 
to  the  idea,  that  Godsufl'eretl  his  Prophets,  and  Je- 
sus   his   beloved  8on,   to  be  cruelly  treated   and 
slain  by  the  Jews,  for  the  purpovse  of  taking  away 
every  excuse  that  they  might  offer  for  their  guilt. 

In  explaining  the  objects  of  Jesus's  death  on  the 
cross,  the  Editor  confidently  assumes,  thai  "  If  we 
view  Jesus  Christ  as  atoning  for  the  sins  of  men, 
we  have  every  thing  perfectly  in  character  :  he  be- 
came incarnate   to  accomplish   that  which   could 
have  been  effected  by  neither  men  nor  angels."    I 
should  therefore  wish  to  know  whether  Jesus,  whom 
the  Kditor  represents  as  God   incarnate,   sufl'ered 
death  and  pain  for  the   sins  of  men    in    his  divine 
nature,  or  in  his  human  capacity  ?  The    former 
must  be   highly  inconsistent  with   the  nature  of 
God,  which,  we  are  persuaded  to  believe   by  rea- 
son and  tradition,    is  above  being  rendered  liable 
to  death  or  pain  ;  since  the  difference  we  draw  be- 
tween God,  and  the  objects  that  are  not   God,  is, 
that  one  cannot  be  subjected  to  death  or  termina- 
tion, and  the  other  is  finite  and  lial>le  to  mortality. 
That  the  effects  of  Christ's  appearance  on  earth, 


f 


'r )' 


206 

whether  with  respect  to  the  salvation  or  condem- 
nation of  mankind,  were  finite,  and  therefore  suit- 
able to  the  nature  of  a  finite  being  to  accomplish, 
is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  to  the  present  time 
millions  of  human  beings  are  daily  passing  through 
ihe  world,  whom  the  doctrin«^s  he  taught  have  ne- 
ver reached,  and  who  of  course  must  be  consider- 
ed as  excluded  from  the  benefit  of  his  having  died 
for  the  remission  of  their  >ins.  The  latter,  name- 
ly, that  Jesus  suflered  death  and  pain  in  his  human 
capacity   as   an   atonement    for    the    offences    of 
others,  seems  totally  inconsistent  with  the  justice 
ascribed  to  God,  and  even  at  variance  with  those 
principles  of  equity  required  of  men  ;  for  it  would 
be  a  piece  of  gross  iniquity  to  afflict  one  innocent 
being,  who  had  all  the  human    feelings,   and   who 
had  never  transgressed  the  will  of  God,  with  the 
death  of  the   cross,  for  the  crimes  committed  by 
others,  especially  when   he  declares  such  great 
aversion  to  it,  as  is  manifi^st  from  the  following 
passages.     Mattheic,  ch.   xxvi.   vers.  37,  39,  42 
and  43:  "And  he  took  with  him  Peter  and  the 
two  sons  of  Zebedee,  and  began  to  be  sorrowful 
and  very  heavy.  And  prayed,  saying,  O  my  Father, 
if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  [meaning  death]  pass 
from  me  :  nevertheless,  not  as  1  will,  biit  as  thcu 
wilt.     He  went  away  again  the  second  time,  and 
prayed,  saying,  O  my  Father,  if  this  cup  may  not 
pass  away  from  me,  except  I  drink  it,  thy  will  be 
done."     Mar/:,  ch.  xiv.  ver.   36:  "And  he  said, 
Abba,  Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto  thee  ; 


A 


4li 


2U7 

take  c'iway  this  cup  from   me  :  nevertheless,  uot 
what  1  will,  but  what  thou  wilt."     Luke,  ch.  xxii. 
vers.  42  and  44 :   "  tSaying,  Father,  if  thou  be 
willing,  remove  thiscup  from  me  ;  nevertheless,  not 
my  will,  but  thine  be  done.     And  being  in  an  ago- 
ny he  prayed  more  earnestly  ;  and  his  sweat  was 
as  it   were  great  drops  of  blood,  falling  down  to 
the  ground."     Juhn,  ch.   xii.   ver.  27  :  "  Now  is 
my  soul  troubled  ;  and  what  shall  I  say  ?     Father, 
save  me  from  this  hour  :  but  for  this  cause  came 
I  unto  this  hour."    Do  not  these  passages  evident- 
ly show,  that  Jesus  in  his  human  capacity  (accord- 
ing to  the  Trinitarian  phrase)  felt  averse  to  death 
and   pain,  and   that  he  earnestly  prayed   that  he 
might  not  be  subjt^cted  to  it  ?      Jesus,  however, 
•  knowing  that  the  will  of  the  Father  rendered  such 
death    unavoidable,    yielded   to    it   as    predicted. 
John,  ch.  xi.   vers.  17  and  J8  :  "  Therefore  doth 
my  Father  tore  me,   beciu^e  /  laij  down  my  life 
that  I  might  take  it  again  :  no  rnan  taketh  it  from 
me,  but  1  lay  it  down  of  myself;  1  have  power  to 
lay  it  down,  and  I   have  power  to  take  it  a^ain\ 
this  commnrnhnent  hare  I  received  of  mif  Father.'^ 
Matthew,  c\\.  xxvi.  vers.  53  and  54:  "Thinkest 
thou  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  my  Father,  and  he 
shall  presently  give  me  more  than  twelve  legions 
of  angels  ?  But  how  then  shall  the   Scripture  be 
fulfilled,  that  thus  it  must  be?"     The  iniquity  of 
one's  being  sentenced  to  death  as  an  atonement 
for  the  fault  committed  by  another,  is  so  palpable, 
that  although  in  many  countries  the  human  race 


?1 


J 


0 


I 


\ 


I 


208 

think  themselves  justified  in  detaining  the  persons 
of  those  men  who,  voluntarily  making  themselves 
responsible  for  the  debt  or  the  persons  of  others, 
fail  to  fulfil  their  engagements  ;  nevertheless, 
every  just  man  among  them  would  shudder  at  the 
idea  of  one's  being  put  to  death  for  a  crime  com- 
mitted by  another,  even  if  the  innocent  man  should 
willingly  offer  his  life  in  behalf  of  that  other. 

In  endeavouring  to  prove  Jesus's  atonement  for 
sin  by  his  death,  the  Reverend  Editor  urges,  "  Is 
he  called  the  Saviour  of  men,  because  he  gave 
them  moral  precepts,  by  obeying  which  they  might 
obtain  the   Divine  favour,  with  the  enjoyment  of 
heaven  as  their  just  desert  ?  or,  because  he  died 
in  their  stead,  to  atone  for  their  sins  and  procure 
for  them  every  blessing,  Slc.  ?  If  Jesus  be  termed 
a  Saviour   merely  because    he    instructed    men, 
he  has  this  honour  in  common  with  Moses,  and 
Elijah,   and   John  the    Baptist,  neither  of  whom 
however  assumed    the   title  of    Saviour."       We 
find  the  title  "Saviour"  applied  fr«M]uently  in  the 
divine  writings  to  those  persons  who  had  been  en- 
dued with  the  power  of  saving  people,  either  by 
inculcating  doctrines,  or  afibrding   protection  to 
them,  although  none  of  them  atoned  for  the  sins 
of  mankind  by  their  death.     Ohadiah,  ver.  21  : 
"  And  saviour<  shall  come  up  on  mount  Zion  to 
judge  the  mount  of  Esau  ;  and  the  kingdom  shall 
be  "the   Lord's."       Nehemiah,  ch.   ix.    ver.  27  : 
"And  according   to  thy  manifold  mercies   thou 
c/avest  them  saviours,  who  saved  them  out  of  the 


s 


209 

hand  of  their  enemies."  2  Kings,  ch.  xiii.  ver.  5 : 
"  The  Lord  gave  Lsrael  a  saviour,  so  that  they 
went  out  from  under  the  hand  of  the  Syrians." 
How  could,  therefore,  the  Editor,adiligentstudent 
of  the  Bible,  lay  such  a  stress  upon  the  applica- 
tion of  the  term  "  Saviour"  to  Jesus,  as  to  adduce 
It  as  a  proof  of  the  doctrine  of  atonement  ;  espe- 
cially when  Jesus  himself  declares  frequently,  that 
he  saved  the  people  solely  through  the  inculcation 
of  the  word  of  God  ?  John,  ch.  xv.  ver.  3:  "  iNow 
ye  are  clean  through  the  word  which  I  have  spo- 
ken unto  you."  Ch.  v.  ver.  24  :  "  He  that  heareth 
my  word,  and  believeth  on  him  that  sent  me,  hath 
everiasting  life."  Ch.  vi.  ver.  63  :  "  The  words 
that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit,  and  iheyare 
life  :"— wherein  Jesus  represents  himself  as  a  Sa- 
viour, or  a  distributer  of  eternal  life,  in  his  capacity 
of  divine  teacher. 

Jesus  is  of  course  justly  termed  and  esteemed  a 
Saviour,  for  having  instructed  men  in  the  Divine 
will  and  law,  never  before  so  fully  revealed. 
Would  it  degrade  Jesus  to  revere  him  as  a  Divine 
Teacher,  because  Moses  and  the  Prophets  before 
him  delivered  to  the  people  divine  instructions  ? 
Or  would  it  depreciate  the  dignity  of  Jesus,  to  be- 
lieve that  he,  in  common  with  several  other  pro- 
phets, underwent  afliictions  and  death  ?  Such  an 
idea  is  indeed  unscriptural,  for  God  represents  the 
Christ  as  a  Prophet  equal  to  Moses,  Dent  ch. 
xviii.  ver.  18.  Jesus  declares  himself  to  have 
^onje  to  fulfil  the  law  taught  by  Moses,  (Matthmc, 

30 


s.  f\ 


Vi 


111 


I' 


t 


#  -^ 


»  » 


210 

di.  V  ver.  7,)  *^  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  de- 
stroy the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  1  am  not  come  to 
destroy  but  to  fulfil  ;"  and  strictly  commands  his 
disciples  and  the  people  at  large  to  obey  what- 
ever  Moses  had  taught.  Ch.  xxiii.  vers.  2,  3: 
"  Saying,  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sit  in  Moses' 
seat  :  all  therefore  whatsoever  they  bid  you 
observe,  that  observe  and  do  ;  but  do  not  ye  after 
taeir  works  :  for  they  say,  and  do  not." 

I  am  sorry  that  I  cannot,  witliout  offendmg 
my  conscience,  agree  with  the  Reverend  Editor 
in  the  opinion,  that  -  If  Jesus  be  esteemed  merely 
a  teacher,  the  greater  degree  of  honour  must  be 
given  to  Moses,  tor  it  was  in  reality  his  law  that 
Jesus  explained  and  established." 

It  is  true  that  Moses  bejian  to  erect  the  ever- 
lasting  edifice  of  tru(^   relifirion,    consisting  of  a 
knowledge  of  the  unity  of  God,  and  obedience  to 
his  will  and  comiuandments  ;  but  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth has  completed  the  structure,  and  rendered  his 
law  perfect.     To  convince  the  Editor  of  this  fact, 
I  beg  to  call  his  attention  toihe  following  instances, 
found  even  in  a  single  chapter,  as  exhibiting  the 
perfection  to  whirh  Jesus  brouirht  the  Law  given 
by  Moses  and  other  Prophets.  Maithew.ch.  v.  vers. 
21    22  :  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them 
of  old  time,  Thou  shalt  not  kill ;  and  whosoever 
shall  kill  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment ;  but 
I  say  unto  you,   That  whosoever  is  angry  with  his 
brother  without  a  cause,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the 
judgment ;  and  whosoever  shall  say  to  his  brother. 


211 

Raca,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  council :  but  who- 
soever shall  say.  Thou  fool,  shall  be  in  danger  of 
hell  fire."  Vers.  27,28  :  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it 
was  said  by  them  of  old  time,  Thou  shalt  not 
commit  adultery  :  but  1  say  unto  you,  that  whomso- 
ever looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  haih 
committed  adultery."  Vers.  31,  32  :  "  It  hath  been 
said,  Whosoever  shall  put  away  his  wife,  let  him 
give  her  a  writing  of  divorcement :  but  I  say  unto 
you.  That  wht)soever  shall  put  away  his  wife,  sa- 
ving for  the  cause  of  fornication,  causeth  her  to 
commit  ad.  Itery."  Verses  3t5,  39 ;  "Ye  have 
heard  that  it  hath  been  said.  An  eye  for  an  eye, 
and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth  ;  but  I  say  unto  you,  that 
ye  resist  not  evil  :  but  whosoever  shall  smite  thee 
on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also." 
Vers.  43 — 45  :  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it  halh  been 
said,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour,  and  hate 
thine  enemy  :  but  I  say  unto  you,  Love  your  ene- 
mies, bless  them  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that 
hate  you,  and  |)ray  for  them  that  despitefully 
use  you  and  persecute  you  ;  that  ye  may  be  the 
children  of  your  Father  whieh  is  in  heaven  :  for 
he  maketh  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  on  the 
good,  and  senchtli  ruin  on  thc^  j«ist  and  on  the  un- 
just." Now  I  hope  I  may  be  justified  in  express- 
ing my  belief,  (though  it  vari(\s  from  the  declara- 
tion made  by  the  Edicor,)  ihut  no  greaffiV  honour 
can  be  justly  given  to  any  teacher  of  the  will  of 
God,  than  what  is  due  to  the  author  of  the  doc- 
trines just  quoted,  which,   with  a  power  no  less 


#1 

ii 


! 


\'l 


(i.M<: 


,\ 


u 


1l 


0  m 


If 


I 


* 


than  standing  miracles  could  produce,  carry 
with  them  proofs  of  their  divine  origin  to  the 
eonviction  of  the  high  and  low,  the  learned  and 

unlearned. 

The  Editor,  in  page  101,*  lays  much  stress  on 
circumstances,  the  very  minuteness  of  which,  he 
thinks,  "  serves  to  enhance  their  value  as  testimo- 
nies."   He  alludes  to  the  epithet  "  Lamb  of  God" 
having  been  twice   applied   to  Jesus  by  John  the 
Baptist,  two  of  whose  disciples  were  thereby  in- 
duced to  become  followers  of  Jesus.    This  is  con- 
sidered by    the  Editor  as  implying  an  admission 
on  the  part   of  Christ,  that  as  a  lamb,   particu- 
larly the  Paschal  Lamb,  was  used  in  sacrifice  as 
an    atonement   for  sins,  he  also    came   into  the 
world  to  sacrifice  his  life  as  an  atonement  for  sin. 
We  find,  however,   the  term  "  lamb,"  as  well  as 
^  sheep,"  applied  in  other   places,  where  no  allu- 
sion to  the  sacrificial  lamb  can  be  well  imagined, 
and  from  which  we  infer  that  these  were  epithets 
generallly  applied  to  innocence  subjected  to  perse- 
eution;  a  meaning  which  sufficiently  accords  with 
the  use  of  the  word  lamb  in  the  instance  in  ques- 
tion.    We  have  those  terms  applif'd  by  Jesus  to 
his  disciples  in  John,  ch.  xxi.  vers.  15 — 17,  where 
he  commands  Simon  Peter  "  to  feed  his  lambs," 
"  to  feed  his  sheep  ;"  and  in  ch.  x.  vers.  26,  27, 
*'  Ye  believe  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep/' 
..— "  My  sheep  hear  n^y  voice."     Now  many  of  the 
apostles   suflered    death  in  consequence  of  their 

*  [London  edition,  page  37.] 


\ 


endeavours  to  withdraw  men  from  sin  :  but  the 
Editor  will  not  thence,  I  presume,  maintain, 
though  it  follow  from  his  argument,  that  the  term 
"  lamb"  was  applied  to  them,  to  show  that  by  their 
death,  they  also  atoned  for  the  sins  of  mankind. 
The  Reverend  Editor  might  hnve  spared  the  ar- 
guments he  has  adduced  to  prove,  that  Jesus  was 
sent  into  this  world  as  the  long-expected  Messiah, 
intended  to  suffer  death  and  difiiculties  like  other 
prophets  who  went  before  him  ;  as  the  Editor 
may  find  in  the  compilation  in  question,  as  well 
as  in  its  defence,  Jesus  of  Nazareth  represented 
as  "  The  Son  of  God,"  a  term  synonymous  with 
that  of  Messiah,  the  highest  of  all  the  prophets ; 
and  his  life  declares  him  to  have  been,  as  repre- 
sented in  the  Scriptures,  pure  as  light,  innocent  as 
a  lamb,  necessary  for  eternal  life  as  bread  for  a 
temporal  one,  and  great  as  the  angels  of  God,  or 
rather  greater  than  they.  He  also  might  have 
omitted  to  quote  such  authority  as  shows,  that 
Christ,  being  a  mediator  between  God  and  men, 
"  declared  that  whatsoever  they  (his  apostles)  shall 
ask  in  his  name,  the  Father  will  give  them  ;"  for 
the  Compiler,  in  his  defence  of  the  Precepts  of 
Jesus,  repeatedly  acknowledged  Christ  as  the  Re- 
deemer, Mediator,  and  Intercessor  with  God,  in 
behalf  of  his  followers.  But  such  intercession 
does  not,  I  presume,  tend  to  a  proof  of  the  deity 
or  the  atonement  of  Jesus,  as  interf)reted  by  the 
Editor  ;  for  God  is  re[)resented  in  the  sacred 
books  to  have  often  shown  mercy  to  mankind 
for  righteous  men's  sakes  ;  how  much  more  then 


'¥ 


\ 


n 


i 


5      1 
,     4 


<     t 


214 

would    be   naturally  manifest  bis  favour   towards 
those  wbo  niigbt  petition  bim  in  the  name  of  one, 
whom  he  anointed  and  exalted  over  all  creatures 
and   prophets  ?     Genesis,  ch.  xxx.  ver.  27  :  "  I 
have  learned  by  experience,   that  the  Lord  hath 
blessed  me  for  \  by  sake."     Jtrcmiah,   ch.   xxvii. 
ver.  18:  "  But  if  they  be  prophets,  and  if  the  word 
of  the  Lord  be  with  them  let  them  now  make  in- 
tercession to  the  Lord  of  hosts."     Moreover,  we 
find  angels  declared  to  have  been  endued  with  the 
power  of  pardoninjT  and  redeeming  men  on  vari- 
ous   occasions.     Genesis,    ch.    xlviii.     ver.    16  : 
**  The   Anjiels  which  redeemeth    me    from    evil, 
bless  the  lads  r  Exodus,  ch.  xxii.  vers.  20,  21  : 
"  Behold,  I  send  an  Angel  before  thee,  to  keep 
thee  in  the  way,  and  to  bring  thee  into  the  place 
which    I    have    prepared.     B<iware  of    him,   and 
obey  his  voice,  provoke  him  not,  for  he  will  not 
pardon  your   transgressions  :  for  my  name  is   in 

him." 

With  regard  to  this  doctrine,  T    have  carefully 

noticed  every  argumeia  advanced  by  the  Edi- 
tor, from  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself,  in  its 
support ;  and  have  adduced  such  arguments  as 
may  be  used  by  those  that  reject  that  doctrine, 
and  which  they  rest  on  the  authority  of  the  same 
Divine  Teacher  :  leaving  the  decision  of  the  sub- 
ject to  the  discreet  judgment  of  the  public,  but  de- 
clining to  deliver  any  opinion,  as  an  individual,  as 
to  the  merits  thereof. 


A 


215 


#fl 


CHAPTER  \. 

On  the  Doctrines  and  Miracvlous  Narrations  of 

the  Aew  Testament. 

I  REGRET  that  the  Editor  should  have  accused 
the  Compiler  of  having  charged  **  on  the  dogmas 
or  doctrines  of  Christianity  those  wars  and  that 
bloodshed  which  have  occurred  between  nations 
merely  termed  Christians."  The  Com[)iler,  in  his 
defence  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  has  ascribed 
sjch  disputes  and  contentions  not  to  any  thing 
containe  I  in  the  Scriptures,  but  to  the  different 
interpretations  of  dogmas  wliich  he  esteemed  not 
essential  for  salvation.  In  order  to  convince  the 
Editor  of  the  accuracy  of  my  assertion,  I  entreat 
his  attention  to  page  18,  line  22,  and  page  22, 
line  24,  of  my  defence  of  the  compiled  Precepts, 
under  the  designation  of  "  An  Appeal  to  the 
Christian  Public."* 

The  Editor  observes,  that  "  wars  and  bloodshed 
existed  before  the  promulgation  of  Christianity  in 
the  world  ;  neither  Christianity,  therefore,  nor  its 
dogmas,  created  the  causes  of  wars  and  blood- 
shed. They  existed  in  the  human  mind  long  be- 
fore its  doctrines  were  published  ;  and  that  quar- 
rels and  feuds  between  the  Arians  and  the  Or- 
thodox in  the  fourth   and  fifth  centuries  were  lit- 


k 


* 


[See  above,  p.  117,  line  26,  and  p.  121,  lines  1 — 4.] 


'it    '  \ 


.<!»-      w'T 


M 


216 

tie  more  than  struggles  for  power  and  wealth." 
Although  human  frailty  and  want  of  perfection  in 
men  are  in  fact  esteemed  as  the  first  and  original 
causes  of  their  improper  conduct  and  wicked 
deeds,  yet  in  the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the 
term  "  cause,"  good  or  evil  acts  are  invariably  at- 
tributed to  their  immediate  motives,  ascertained 
form  circumstantial  evidence  ;  and  these  acts  are 
consequently  held  to  entitle  their  respective  agents 
to  praise  or  reproach. — But  as  the  motives  of  ac- 
tions and  the  secrets  of  the  human  heart  are  in 
truth  known  to  God  alone,  it  is  indeed  beyond  my 
power  to  establish  in  a  satisfactory  manner,  that 
the  majority  of  the  primitive  Aiiansand  Trinitari- 
ans were  excited  by  their  mistaken  religious  zeal 
to  slay  each  other,  and  not  by  a  desire  of  power 
and  worldly  advancement.  I  would  appeal,  how- 
ever, to  the  Editor  himself,  whether  it  would  not 
be  indeed  very  illiberal  to  suppose,  that  almost  all 
the  Christian  world  should  for  a  period  of  two 
hundred  years  have  been  weak  or  wicked  enough 
to  engage  wilfully  in  causing  the  blood  of  each 
other  to  be  shed  under  the  cloak  of  religion,  and 
merely  for  worldly  motives.  But  as  this  must  be 
a  matter  of  opinion,  I  beg  to  show  that  which  has 
been  entertained  on  the  subject  by  one  of  the 
highest  authorities  against  the  Trinitarians  who 
have  written  on  the  history  of  Christianity.  I 
allude  to  Dr.  Moshiem,  whose  words  1  here  give, 
and  I  entreat  my  readers  to  draw  their  own  infer 
*^nces  from  them. 


211 

Volume  1.  page  419  :  "  After  the  death  of  Con- 
stantino the  Great,  one  of  his  sons,  Constantius, 
who  in  the  division  of  the  empire  became  ruler  of 
the  East,  was  warmly  attached  to  the  Arian  party, 
%vhose  principles  were  also  zealously  adopted  by  the 
Empress,  and   indeed  by  the  whole  court.     On 
the  other  hand,  Constantino  and  Constans,  Em- 
perors of  the  West,  maintained  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Nice  throughout  all  the  provinces  be- 
tween the  two  contending  parties.— Hence  arose 
endless   animosities    and    seditions,    treacherous 
plots,  and  open  acts  of  injustice  and  violence  be- 
tveen  the  two  contending  parties ;  Council  was 
assembled  against  Council,  and  their  jarring  and 
contradictory  decrees  spread  perplexity  and  con- 
fusion throughout  the  Christian   world."     Page 
420:      "His   (Gratian's)   zeal  for  their  interest, 
though  fervent  and  active,  was  surpassed  by  that 
of  his  successor  Theodosius  the  Great,  who  raised 
the  secular  arm  against  the  Arians  with  a  terrible 
degree  of  violence,  drove  them  from  their  churches, 
and  enacted  laws,  whose  severity  exposed  them 
to  the  greatest  calamities."     It  is  difficult  to  con- 
ceive what  other  motives  than  those  of  mistaken 
zeal  for  a  particular  doctrine  could  have  influen- 
ced the  mind  of  an  Emperor  like  Theodosius  to 
such  acts  of  cruelty  and  violence :  but  however 
that  may  be,  it  is  obvious  that  if  such  a  mode  of 
interpreting  conduct  be  adopted,  it  is  difficult  to 
say  where  we  are  to  stop.     The  devotion  even  of 
the  Ai)ostles  and  Martyrs  of  Christianity,  may  be 

31 


\1 


h 


4 

1^ 


1     5 


i^^ 


w 


218 

attributed  to  a  pursuit  after  power  over  the  minds 
and  respect  in  the  eyes  of  men,  and  all  distinc- 
tion of  good  and  evil  character  be  considered  as 
futile  and  without  foundation.     With  respect  to 
the  final  success  of  the  Trinitarian  party,  it  ap- 
pears to  me  the  event  naturally  to  have  been  ex- 
pected.    For,  to  the  people  of  those  ages,  doc- 
trines that  resembled  the  polytheistical  belief  that 
till  then  prevailed,  must  have  been  more  accepta- 
ble than  those  which  were  diametrically  opposed 
to  such  notions.     The  idea  of   a  God  in  human 
form  was  easy  and  familiar :  Emperors  and  Em- 
presses had   altars  raised   to  them   even  during 
their  lives,  and  after  death  were  enrolled  as  divi- 
nities.    Perhaps  too,  something  may  justly  be  at- 
tributed to  a  cenain  degree  of  pride  and  satisfac- 
tion in  the  idea,  that  the  religion  they  had  begun 
to  profess  was  dictated  immediately  by  the  Deity 
himself,  rather  than  by  any  subordinate  agency. 
There  had  not  been  among  the  heathens  any  class 
of  mankind   to  whom  they  were  accustomed   to 
look  up  with  that  devotion   familiarly  entertained 
by  the  Jews  towards  Moses  and  their  Prophets, 
and  they  were  consequently  ready  to  elevate  to  a 
God  any  being  who  rose  in  their  estimation  above 
the  level  of  mankind. 

The  violence  and  outrages  which  Roman  Ca- 
tholics and  Protestants  have  experienced  from 
each  other,  were  not,  of  course,  as  observed  by 
the  Reverend  Editor,  owing  in  their  origin  to 
the  adoption  of  diflerent  interpretations  respect- 
ing the  deity  of  Christ  or  of  the  Holy  Ghost ; 


219 

but  they  were  the  immediate  consequences  of  the 
different  sentiments  they  have  held  with  respect 
to  the  doctrine  of  an  exclusive  power  of  granting 
absolution,  and  leading  to  eternal  life,  being  vest- 
ed in  St.  Peter  and  his  successors.  What  great 
mischief  has  however  een  produced,  and  how 
many  lives  have  from  time  to  time  been  destroyed, 
from  the  difference  of  sentiments  held  by  the  par- 
ties with  regard  to  this  doctrine,  which  even  the 
Editor  himself  does  not  deem  an  essential  point 
of  religion  ! 

The  Editor  in  p.  1 14*  argues,  as  a  proof  of  the 
importance  of  the  doctrines  of  the   Gospel,   that 
Christ   taught   them,  fully    foreseeing?  that   they 
woijld  be  the  subject  of  dispute  ;  and  quotes  his 
saying,  that  he  came  not  to  send  peace  on  earth, 
but  a  sword.     The   whole  of  the   lOtb  chap,  of 
Matthew,  from  which  the  Editor  quotes  the  pas- 
sage here  alluded  to,  consists  of  the  instructions 
delivered  by  Jesus  to  the  twelve   Apostles,  when 
he  sent   them   forth  to  preach  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  hotise  of  Israel ; 
but  has  no  allusion,  that  I   can  perceive,  to  eter- 
nal dissentions  amongst  those  who  were  already 
or  might  afterwards  become  Christians       That 
Jesus  foresaw,  as  one  of  the  primary  effects  of 
preaching  his  Gospel,  that  great  dissentions  would 
arise — that  he  was  aware  that  the  great  question 
of  confessing  him  to  be  the  Messiah  or  not,  would 
be  as  a  sword  between  a  man  and  his  father,  the 
daughter  and  her  mother,  and  the  daughter-in-law 

*  (London  Edition,  p.  56.) 


1  -m 


iK  Ij 


V  4 


i\ 


\\ 


s^w 


it 


220 


and  her  molhcr-in-law,  is  evident.  But  this 
seems  to  me  by  no  means  to  prove  that  Jesus,  as 
supposed  by  the  Editor,  **  longed  or  almost  long- 
ed" to  see  a  fire  kindled  in  the  earth  respecting 
doctrines  not  essential  to  the  salvation  of  mankind. 
Nor  would  it  have  been  any  reason  for  suppressing 
the  most  trivial  of  his  sayings,  that  priestcraft 
workingon  the  ignorance  and  superstition,  the  big- 
otry or  intolerance  of  mankind,  should  have  wrest- 
ed his  words  to  evil  purposes. — As  observed  by 
the  Editor  himself,  the  mischief  lay  originally  in 
human  nature,  not  in  any  part  of  the  doctrines  of 
Christ ;  but  as  those  disscntions  are  now  [)erpe- 
tuated  principally  by  education,  a  cause  essentially 
distinct  from  their  origin,  the  case  is  entirely  al- 
tered Tiie  corruption  of  the  human  heart  cannot 
be  totally  removed  ;  but  the  evil  effects  that  s[)ring 
from  human  institutions  may  be  avoided,  when 
their  roixl  sources  are  known.  After  the  secret 
and  immediate  causes  of  persecution  have  passed 
away,  the  dilVcrences  of  opirnon  which  iiave  b(;en 
the  dechned  grounds  of  hostility  are  handed 
down  bv  the  teachers  of  ditlerent  sects  ;  and,  as 
already  repeatedly  avowed,  it  was  witi»  the  view  of 
evading,  not  those  questions  concerning  which 
Jesus  spoke  and  which  distinguish  his  followers 
from  all  others,  but  those  which  have  from  time  to 
time  been  seized  upon  to  excite  enmities  still  ex- 
isting amongst  felluw-christians,  that  the  Compi- 
ler confined  himself  to  those  Precepts,  concerning 
which  all  mankind  must  be  of  one  accord. 
As  tothe  (|uestionof  the  Editor,  **  it  can  scarcely 


I 


I 
j 


22] 

be  unknown  to  the  Compiler,  that  the  very  being  of 
a  God  has  been  for  numerous  ages  the  subject  of 
dispute  among  the  most  learned  of  his  own  coun- 
try ;  does  he  account  this  a  sufficient  reason   for 
suppressing  this  doctrine  ?  We  know  that  he  does 
not.     Why  then  should  he  omit  the  doctrines  of 
Christ  and  his  Apostles,  because  men  have  made 
them  the  subject  of  dispute  ?"  For  a  direct  answer 
to  this  question,  I  beg  to  referthe  Reverend  Editor 
tothe  Appeal  of  the  Compiler,  page  27,  wherein 
he  will  find  tfiat  he  assigns  not  one,  but  two  cir- 
cumstances, as  concurring  to  form  the  motive  of 
his  having  omitted  certain   doctrines  of  Christi- 
anity in  his  selection.— 1st,  that  they  are  the  sub- 
jects of  disputes  and  contention,— 2ndly,  that  they 
are  not  essential  to  religion.*     It  is   therefore  ob- 
vious,   that    the  analogy  between  the  omission  of 
certain  dogmas,  and  that  of  the  being  of  a  God, 
has  been  unfairly  drawn  by  the  Editor.     Admit- 
ting that  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  and  the  ex- 
istence of  a  God  are  equally  liable  to  disputes,  it 
should  be  recollected   that  the  former  are,  in  the 
estimation   of  the  Compiler,  not  essential  to  reli- 
gion ;  while  the  latter  is  acknowledged  by  him,  in 
common  with   th(i  professors  of  every  faith,  to  be 
the  foundation  of  all  religion,  as  distinctly  stated 
in  his  Introduction  tothe  select  Precepts  of  Jesus. 
Every    system   of  religion   adopts  the  idea  of  a 
God,  and  avows  this  as  its  fundamtnitnl  principle, 
though  they  difier  from  one  another  in  representing 


-» 


fSpc  ahovo,  p.  1«I5.] 


I 
I'       ii 

It  ^ 


n 


I 


'11 


ii 


5*2i.' 


I! 


the  nature  and  attributes  of  the  Deity.  The  Com- 
piler therefore  could  have  no  motive  for  suppress- 
ing the  doctrines  of  the  being  of  a  God,  though 
disputed  by  a  few  pretended  literary  men  ;  and 
he  has  consequently  never  hesitated  to  inculcate 
with  all  his  power  the  idea  of  one  God  to  the 
learned  and  unlearned  of  his  own  country,  taking 
care  at  the  same  time  as  much  as  possible  not  to 
enter  into  particulars  as  to  the  real  nature,  essence, 
attributes,  person,  or  substance  of  the  Godhead, 
those  being  points  above  his  comprehension,  and 
liable  to  interminable  disputes.  The  Reverend 
Editor  thus  expresses  his  surprise  at  the  conduct 
of  the  Compiler,  in  omitting  iu  his  selection  the 
miraculous  relations  of  the  Gospel  : — "  We  can- 
not but  wonder  that  his  miracles  should  not  have 
found  greater  favour  in  the  eyes  of  the  Compiler 
of  this  selection,  while  the  amazing  weight  which 
Jesus  himself  attached  to  them  could  scarcely  have 
escaped  his  notice  :"  and  in  order  to  prove  the  im- 
portance of  the  miracles  asciibed  to  Jesus,  the 
Editor  quotes  three  instances,  in  the  first  of  which 
Jesus  referred  John  the  Baptist  to  his  wonderful 
miracles  ;  in  the  second,  he  called  tiie  attention 
of  unbelieving  Jews  to  his  miraculous  works  as  a 
proof  of  his  divine  mission  ;  in  the  third,  he  re- 
commends Philip  the  Apostle  to  the  evidence  of 
his  miracles.  But  after  a  slight  attention  to  the 
circumstances  in  which  those  appeals  were  made, 
it  appears  clearly,  that  in  these  and  other  instan- 
ces Jesus  referred  to  his  miracles  those  persons 


^ 


223 

only  who  either  scrupled  to  believe,  or  doubted  him 
as  the  promised  Messiah,  or  required  of  him  some 
sign  to  confirm  their  faith.     Vide  Matthew,  ch.  xi. 
vers.  2—4  :  "  When  John  had  heard  in  the  prison 
the  works  of  Christ,  he  sent  two  of  his  disciples, 
and  said  unto  him,  Art  thou  he  that  should  come, 
or  do  we  look  for  another  ?    Jesus  answered  and 
said  unto  them.  Go  and  show  John  those  things 
which  ye  do  hear  and  see."     John,  ch.  x.  vers.  37 
and  38,  Jesus  says  to  those  Jews  who  accused  him 
of  blasphemy,  *'  If  1  do  not  the  works  of  my  Fa- 
ther believe  me  not.     But  */  I  do,  though  ye  be- 
lieve not  me,  believe  the  works,^^     In  reply  to  the 
request   of  Philip,  who,    being  discontented  with 
the  doctrines  Jesus  inculcated,  said,  "  Lord,  shew 
us  the  Father,  and  it  sulficeth  us  ;"  Jesus  answer- 
ed and  said,  "  Believe  me,  that  I  am  in  the  Fa- 
ther and  the  Father  in  me,  or  else  believe   me  for 
the  very  works'  sake."     {Jt^hn,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  11,) 
Jesus  even  speaks  in  terms  of  reproach  of  those 
that  seek  for  miracles  for  their  conviction  as  to  his 
divine  mission       Matthcio,  ch.  xii.  ver.  39  :  "  But 
he  answered  and    said    unto  them,  An  evil    and 
adulterous    generation     seeketh     after  a    sign." 
Moreover,    he  blesses  them  who,  without  having 
recourse  to  the  proofs  of  miracles,  profess  their  be- 
lief on  him.     John,  ch.  xx.  ver.  29  :  "  Jesus  said 
unto  him   Thomas,  because  thou  hast  seen  me  thou 
hast  believed  :  blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen, 
and  yet  have  believed,  ^^ 

Under  these  circumstances,  and  from  the  expo- 


:*      fj 


If 


224 

rieace  that  nothing  but  the  sublimity  of  the  Pre- 
cepts of  Jesus  had  at  first  drawn  the  attention 
of  the  Compiler  himself  towards  Christianity,  and 
excited  his  veneration  for  the  author  of  this  reli- 
^rion,  without  aid  from  miraculous  relations,  he 
omitted  in  his  compilation  the  mention  of  the  mi- 
racles performed  by  Jesus,  without  meaning  to 
express  doubts  of  their  authenticity,  or  intending 
to  slight  them  by  such  an  omission. 

I  regret  therefore,  that  the  Editor  should  have 
suffered  any  part  of  his  valuable  time  to  be  spent 
in  advancing  several  arguments,  in  the  concluding 
part  of  his  Review,  to  establish  the  truth  of  the 
miraculous   statements  of  the    New  Testament. 
But  as  this  discussion  applies  to  the  evidence  of 
miracles  genendly,  it  may  be  worth  considering. 
Arguments  adduced  by  the  Editor  amount  to  this  : 
**  If  all  social,  political,   mercantile,  and  judicial 
transactions  be  allowed  to  rest  upon  testimony  ; 
why  should  not  the  validity  of  Christian   miracles 
be  concluded  from  the  testimony  of  the  Apostles 
and  others,    and  be    relied   upon  by  all  the   na- 
tions of  the  world  ?"    The  Editor  must  be  well 
aware,  that  the  enemies  to  revelation  draw  a  line 
of  distinction  on  the  subject  of  proofs  by  testimo- 
ny, between  the  current  events  of  nature  familiar 
to  the  senses  of  mankind,  and  within  the  scope  of 
human  exertions  ;  and  extraordinary  facts  beyond 
the  limits  of  common  experience,  and  ascribed  to 
a  direct  interposition  of  Divine  power  suspending 
tlie  usual  course  of  nature.  Tf  all  assertions  were  to 


225. 

be  indiscriminately  admitted  as  facts,  merely  be- 
cause they  are  testified  by  numbers,  how  can  we 
dispute  the  truth  of  those  miracles  which  are  said 
to  have  been  performed  by  persons  esteemed  holy 
amongst  natives  of  this  country  ?  The  Compiler 
has  never  placed  the  miracles  related  in  the  New 
Testament  on  a  footing  with  the  extravagant  tales 
of  his  countrymen,   but  distinctly    expressed   his 
persuasion  that  they  (Christian   miracles)  would 
be  apt  at  best    to  carry  little    weight  with   those 
whose  imaginations  had  been  accustomed  to  dwell 
on  narrations  much  more  wonderful,  and  support- 
ed by  testimony  which  they  have  been  tau<rht  to  re- 
gard with  a  reverence  that  they  cannot  be  expected 
all  at  once  to  bestow  on  the  Apostles.     See  Intro- 
duction to  the  Precepts,  and  Appeal,  p.  17.*  The 
very  same  line  of  argument,  indeed,  pursued  by  the 
Editor,  would  equally  avail  the   Hindoos.     Have 
they  not  accounts   and  records  handed   down  to 
them  relating  to  the  wonderful  miracles  stated  to 
have  been  performed  by  their  saints,  such  as  Ugus- 
tyu,  Vushistu,  and  Gotum  ;  and  their  gods  incar- 
nate, such  as  Ram,  Krishnu,  and  Nursingh  ;  in  pre- 
sence of  their  cotemporary    friends  and  enemies, 
the  wise  and  the  ignorant,  the  select  and  the  mul- 
titude ? — Could  not  the  Hindoos  quote  in  support 
of  their  narrated    miracles,   authorities  from  the 
histories   of  their  most    inveterate    enemies  the 
Jeins,  who  join   the  Hindoos  entirely  in  acknow 

*  [Present  edition,  page  115.] 

82 


i"    \ 


'''r 


I, 


li 


ii 


1^ 


'226 

lecJging  the  trutirand  credibility  of  their  miracu- 
lous accounts  ?  The  only  difference  which  subsists 
between  these  two  parties  on  this  subject  is,  that 
the   Hindoos  consider    the  power  of  performing 
miracles  given  to  their  gods  and  saints  by  the  Su- 
preme Deity,  and  the  Jeins  declare  that  they  per- 
formed  all   those   asionishing   works  by  Asooree 
Shnkti,  or  by  demoniac  power.    Moossulmans,  on 
the  other  hand,  can  produce  records  written  and 
testified  by  cotemporaries  of  JVIohummud,  both 
friends  and  enemies,  who  are  represented  as  eye- 
witnesses of  the  miracles  ascribed  to  him  ;  such 
as    his   dividing  the    moon   into    two  parts,   and 
walking  in    sunshine   without  casting  a  shadow. 
They  can  assert,  too,  that  several  of  those  witness- 
es suffered  the  greatest  calamities,  and  some  even 
death,  in  defence  of  that  religion  ;  some  before 
the  attempts  of  Mohummud  at  conquest,  others 
after  his  commencing  such  attemjits,  and  others 
after  his  death.     On  mature  consideration  of  all 
those  circumstances,   the  C()m|)iler  hopes  he  may 
be  allowed  to  remain  still  of  opinion,  that  the  mi- 
raculous  relations   found    in   the   divine  writings 
would  be  apt   at  best    to  carry  little  weight  with 
ihem,  when  imparted  to  the   Hindoos  at  large,  in 
the  present  state  of  their  minds  :  but  as  no  other 
religion  can  produce  any  thing  that  may  stand  in 
competition  with  the  Precepts  of  Jesus,  much  less 
that  can  be  pretended  to  be  superior  to  them,  the 
Compiler  deemed  it  incumbent  upon  him  to  intro- 
duce these  among  his  countrymen  as  a  Guide  to 
Peace  and  Happiness. 


^227 


CHAPTER  VI. 

On  the  Impersonality  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
Miscellaneous  Remarks, 

I  WILL  now  inquire  into  the  justness  of  the  con- 
clusion drawn  by  the  Editor,  in  his  attempt  to 
prove  the  Deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  from  the  cir- 
cumstance of  his  name  being  associated  with  that 
of  the  Father  in  the  rite  of  Baptism.  This  sub- 
ject is  incidentally  brought  forwani  in  thecourseof 
the  arguments  lie  has  ad  lured  respecting  the  na- 
ture of  Jesus,  w^here  he  observes,  "  It  is  needless 
to  add  that  this  testimony  of  Jesus  (the  asso- 
ciating of  his  own  name  and  that  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  with  the  name  of  the  Father)  is  equally 
decisive  respecting  the  Deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
I  have  hitherto  omitted  to  notice  this  question 
among  other  matters  in  review,  reserving  it  for  the 
express  purpose  of  a  distinct  and  separate  exami- 
nation. It  seems  to  me.  in  the  first  place,  rather 
singular,  that  the  Reverend  Editor,  after  having 
filled  up  many  pages  with  numerous  arguments  in 
his  endeavour  to  establish  the  Godhead  of  Jesus, 
should  have  noticed  in  so  short  and  abrupt  a  man- 
ner, the  question  of  the  Deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
although  the  Editor  equally  esteems  them  both  as 
distinct  persons  of  the  Deity.     I  wonder,  in  the 


J.  *i  i 


(A  y 


ff 

( 


lit 


I 


■\ 


'  I 


I 


I  i 
t  "      I  I* 


h 


I   ( 


228 

uext  place,  how  the  learned  Editor  could  suppose 
a  mere  assuciation  of  names  in  a  rite  to  be  sufficient 
to  prove  the  identity  oi  their  subjects.  1  am  in- 
deed sorry  I  cannot,  without  overlooking  a  great 
many  scriptural  authorities,  ami  defying  reason  to- 
tally, join  the  liiiitor  in  the  opinion,  ihat  the  asso- 
ciation of  the  name  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  that 
of  the  Father  of  the  Universe,  in  the  rite  of  Bap- 
tism, is  *'  decisive"  of,  or  even  allusive  to,  the  se- 
parate personality  of   the  b^pirit. 

2  i  hroiucles,  ch.  xx.  ver.  20  :  "  Jehoshaphat 
stood  and  said,  "  Hear  me,  O  Judah,  and  ye  inha- 
bitants of  Jerusalem  ;  believe  in  the  Lord  your 
God,  so  shall  ye  be  established  ;  believe  his  pro- 
phets, so  sliall  ye  prosper ;"  wherein  the  name  of 
the  Prophets  of  God  is  associated  with  that  of  the 
Deity  himself  in  the  profession  of  belief,  which  is 
considered  by  Christians  of  all  denominations 
more  essential  than  an  external  symbol  of  Chris- 
tianity. Again,  in  Jeremiah,  ch.  xxx.  ver.  9, 
^*  But  they  shall  serve  the  Lord  their  God,  and 
David  their  Kmg,  whom  i  will  raise  up  unto 
them,"  the  Lord  joins  his  name  with  that  of  Da- 
vid in  the  act  of  religious  service,  which  is  in  its 
strictest  sense  esteemed  due  to  God  alone.  Would 
it  not  therefore  be  unscriptural  to  make  an  at- 
tempt to  prove  the  deity  of  the  Prophets,  or  Da- 
vid, under  the  plea  that  their  names  are  associated 
with  that  of  God  in  religious  observances  ?  But 
we  must  do  so,  were  we  to  follow  the  process  of 
reasoning  adopted  by  the  Reverend  Editor.  The 
kind  of  evidence  on  which  the  Editor  relies  in  this 


221) 


instance,  would  besides  suit  admirably  the  purpo- 
ses of  those  who  might  seek  in  the  sacred  Scrip- 
tures, grounds  for  justifying  idolatry.  Fire  wor- 
shippers, for  instance,  insisting  on  the  literal  sense 
of  the  words,  might  refer  to  that  text  in  the  3d 
chapter  of  Matthew,  repeated  in  Luke,  ch.  iii.  ver. 
16,  in  which  it  is  announced,  that  Jesus  Christ 
will  baptise  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  witli  fire.  If 
the  association  in  the  rite  of  Baptism  of  the  names 
of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  with  that  of  the 
Father,  proves  their  divinity  ;  it  is  clear,  that  fire 
also  being  associated  with  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the 
same  rite,  must  likewise  be  considered  as  a  part 
of  the  Godhead. 

God  is  invariably  represented  in  revelation  as 
the  main  object  of  belief,  receiving  worship  and 
prayers  that  proceed  from  the  heart  through  the 
first-born  of  every  creature,  the  Messiah,  ("  No  man 
Cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  me,"  John,  ch.  xiv. 
ver.  6,)  and  leading  such  as  worship  him  in  spirit 
to  righteous  conduct,  and  ultimately  to  salvation, 
through  his  guiding  influence,  which  is  called  the 
Holy  Spirit,  (''  when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is 
come,  he  will  guide  you  into  all  truth,"  John,  cli. 
xvi.ver.  13.)  There  is  therefore  a  moral  obliofation 
on  those  who  avow  the  truth  of  such  revelation  to 
profess  their  belief  in  God  as  the  sole  object  of 
worship  ;  and  in  the  Son,  through  whom  they, 
as  Christians,  should  offer  divine  homage  ;  and 
also  in  the  holy  influence  of  God,  from  which  they 
should  expect  direction  in  the  path  of  righteous- 


/ 


m 


I 


1 1 


'i 


""""-' 


2^0 


) 


uess,  as  the  consequence  of  their  sincere  prayer 
and  supplication.     For  the  same  reason  also  in 
publicly  adopting  this  religion,  it  is  proper  that 
those  who  receive  it  should   be  baptised   in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  who  is  the  object  of  worship  : 
of  the  Son,  who  is  the  mediator  ;  and  of  that  m- 
fluence  by  which  spiritual  blessmgs  are  conveyed 
to  mankind,    designated  in   the  Scriptures  as  the 
Comforter,   Spirit  of  truth,  or  (loly  Spirit.     As 
God  is  declared  through  his  Holy  Spirit  to  have  led 
to  righteousness  such   as  sought  heartily  his  will, 
so  he  is  oqually  repre.sented  to   have  through  his 
wrath  afflicted  rebels  against  his  authority,  and  to 
have  prospered   through  his  infinite   mercy   those 
who  manifested  obedience  to  him  ;  as  appears  from 
the  following  passages.     2  Ki»g»,  ch.   xxiv.  ver. 
'^0  •  "  For  through  the  anger  of  the  liOrd  it  came 
io  pass  in  Jerusalem,   until  he  had  cast  them  out 
from   his   presence."     Fsalm  xc.   ver.    7:  "  For 
we  are  consumed  by  thine  anger,  an.l  iiy  thy  wrath 
are  we    troubled."    Psalm    xxi.  ver.  7:    "And 
through  the  mercy  of  the  Most  High  he  shall  not 
be  moved."   P^alm  vi.  ver.  4  :  "  Return,  O  Lord, 
deliver  ray  soul ;    O  save  mo  for  thy  mercy'>i  sake. 
Nor  can  we  legitimately  infer  the  idea  of  the  self- 
existence    or   distinct    personality    of   the  II<.ly 
Ghost,  from   such   metaphorical  l.mguage  as  the 
followincr  :  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  leach  you. 
Luke,  ch.  xii.  ver.  12.    "  The  Holy  Ghost  is  conic 
upon  you."     Acts,  ch.  1 .  ver.  8.  "  The  Comforter 
who  is   the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father  will 
send."  John,  ch.  xiv.  ver.  26.  For  we  find  expres- 


III 


•I 


231 


sions  ot*  a  similar  nature  applied  to  other  attri- 
butes of  God,  personifying  them  equally  with  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Psalm  Ivii.  ver.  3  :  "  God  shall  send 
forth  his  mercy  and  his  trut/i.^'  Ps,  Ixxxv.  ver.  10  : 
"  Mercy  and  truth  are  7net  together."  Ps  c.  ver.  5: 
"  The  Lord  is  goofl,  his  mercy  is  everlasting ^ 
Ps,  xxxiii.  ver.  22 :  "  Let  thy  mercy,  O  Lord,  be 
upon  us."  Ps.  xxxvi.  ver.  5  :  "  Thy  mercy,  O 
Lord,  is  in  the  h^^avens."  Ps.  eviii.  ver.  4  :  "  For 
thy  mercy  is  great  above  the  heavens."  Ezekiel, 
ch.  vii.  ver.  3  :  '*  I  will  seiid  my  anger  upon  thee." 
2  Clironides,  ch.  xxiv.  ver.  18  :  "  Wrath  came 
upon  Judah  for  this  trespass. 

Were  every  attribute  ascribed  to  the  Deity 
which  is  found  personified,  to  be  therefore  consi- 
dered as  a  distinct  pe»  sonage,  it  would  be  difficult 
to  avoid  forming  a  very  strange  notion  of  the  the- 
ology of  the  Bible.  It  appears  indeed  to  me  im- 
possible to  view  the  Holy  Spirit  as  very  God, 
without  coming  to  ideas  respecting  the  nature  of 
the  Deity,  little  different  from  some  of  those  most 
generally  and  justly  condemned  as  found  amongst 
Polytheists.  Take,  for  instance,  Matthew,  ch  i. 
11,  where  it  is  said,  that  Mary  was  found  with 
child  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Ver.  20  :  "  That  which 
is  conceived  in  her,  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Luke, 
ch.  i.  35  :  **  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon 
thee,  and  the  power  of  the  Highest  shall  over- 
shadow thee."  In  interpreting  these  passages 
according  to  the  opinion  maintained  by  the  Edi- 
tor, we  should  necessarilv  be  drawn  to  the  idea 


232 


2S'S 


that  God  came  upon  Mary,  and  that  the  child 
which  she  bore  was  in  reality  begotten  of  him. 
Is  this  idea,  I  would  beg  to  know,  consistent  with 
the  perfect  nature  of  the  righteous  God  ?  Or  rather, 
is  not  such  a  notion  of  the  Godhead's  having  had 
intercourse  with  a  human  female,  as  horrible  as 
the  sentiments  entertained  by  ancient  and  modern 
heathens  respecting  the  Deity  ?  On  the  other 
hand,  if  we  understand  by  those  passages,  merely 
that  the  miraculous  influence  of  God  came  upon 
Mary,  so  that,  though  a  virgin,  she  bore  a  child, 
every  thing  would  stand  consistent  with  our  be- 
lief of  the  divine  power,  without  shocking  our 
ideas  of  the  purity  of  the  Deity,  inculcated  alike 
by  reason  and  revelation.  This  mode  of  interpre- 
tation is  indeed  confirmed  by  the  very  passage  of 
Lu/ce  above  quoted,  "  The  power  of  the  Highest 
shall  overshadow  thee  ;"  plainly  and  simply  de- 
claring, that  it  was  the  power  of  God  which  gave 
birth  to  the  child,  contrary  to  the  ordinary  course 
of  nature.  If  by  the  term  "  Holy  Ghost"  be  meant  a 
third  distinct  person  of  the  Godhead,  equal  in  power 
and  glory  with  the  Father  of  all ;  I  am  at  a  loss 
to  know  what  Trinitarians  understand  by  such  ex- 
pressions as  the  following  :  Mafthew,  ch.  iii.  vcr. 
11,  and  Luke,  ch.  iii.  ver.  16  :  **  He  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  Acts,  ch. 
X.  ver.  38:  "God  anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power."  Matthew, 
ch.  xii.  ver.  28  :  "I  cast  out  devils  by  the  Spirit  of 
God."  Ver.  31  :  "  All  manner  of  sin  and  blas- 
phemy shall  be  forgiven  unto  men  :  but  the  blas- 


phemy against  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be  fof^ 
given  unto  men."  Luke,  ch.  iv.  ver.  I  :  "  And 
Jesus,  being  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  returned  from 
Jordan."  If  the  term  "  Holy  Ghost"  be  synony* 
mous  wit:i  the  third  person  of  the  Godhead,  and 
"  Christ"  with  the  second  person,  the  foregoing 
passages  may  be  read  as  follows  :  "  He,  the  se- 
cond person,  shall  baptise  you  with  the  third  per« 
son  of  the  Godhead,  and  with  fire."  "  God 
anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  (the  second  person  of 
the  Godhead)  with  the  third  person  of  the  God- 
head, and  with  power."  "  I  (the  second  person 
of  the  Godhead)  cast  out  devils  by  the  third  per- 
son of  the  Godhead."  *'  All  manner  of  sin  and 
blasphemy,  even  against  the  first  and  second  per- 
sons of  the  Godhead,  shall  be  forgiven  unto  men  ; 
but  blasphemy  against  the  third  person  of  the 
Godhead  shall  not  be  forgiven  unto  men."  "  Jesus, 
(the  second  person  of  the  Godhead,)  being  full  of 
the  third  person  of  the  Godhead,  returned  from 
Jordan."  But  little  reflection  is,  1  should  suppose, 
necessary  to  enable  any  one  to  perceive  the  incon- 
sistency of  such  |)araplirases  as  the  foregoing,  and 
the  reasonableness  of  adopting  the  usual  mode  of 
scriptural  interpretation  of  the  original  texts,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  foregoing  passages  may  be 
understood  as  follows  :  "  He  shnll  baptise  you 
with  the  spirit  of  truth  and  purity."  **  God  anoint- 
ed Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  his  holy  influence  and 
power."  "  I  cast  out  dc^vils  by  the  influence  of 
God."     "  All  manner  of  sin  and  blasphemy  even 

33 


^ 


234 

against  the  Christ,  the  first-born  of  every  creature, 
shall  be  forgiven  to  nnen  ;  but  blasphemy  against 
the  power  of  God  shall  not  be  forgiven  unto  nnen." 
"  Jesus,  being  full  of  ihe  influence  of  God,  return- 
ed from  Jordan."    Still   more  dangerous  to  true 
religion  would  it  be  to  interpret,  according  to  the 
Trinitarian  mode,  the  passages  which  describe  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  Jesus  on  the  oc- 
casion of  his   baptism.     Liihe,  ch.    iii.   ver.  22  : 
"  And    the    Holy  Ghost   descended   in   a    bodily 
shape  like  a  dove  upon  him."     For  if  we  believe 
that  Spirit,  in  the  form  of  a  dove,  or  in  any  other 
hodihj  shape,  was  really  the  third   person,  of  the 
Godhead,  how  can  we  justly  charge  with  absurdity 
the   Hindoo   legends  of  the  Divinity    having  the 
form  of  a  fish  or  of  any  other  animal  ? 

It  ought  to  be  remarked,    with  respect  to  the 
text  above  quoted,  denouncing  eternal  wrath  on 
those  who  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  that 
the  occasion  on  which  the  term  was  made  use  of 
by  Christ,  was  the  accusation  of  the  Jews,  that  his 
miracles  were  the  eficicts  of  an  influence  of  a  na- 
ture directly  opposite  to  that  of  God,  namely,  the 
power  of  Beelzebub,  the  IVince  of  Devils.     The 
Jews  alleged  that  he  was  |)()ssessed  of  an  unclean 
or  diabolical   spirit.     ("  Because   they   said,   He 
hath  an  unclean  spirit."     Mark,  ch.  iii.  ver.    30. 
"  They  said.  This  fellow  doth  not  cast  out  devils, 
but  by  Beelzebub,  the  prince  of  devils."  Matthew^ 
ch.  xii.  ver.  24.)     Jesus  affirms,  that  the  Spirit 
which  enabled  him   to  do  those  wonderful  works 


235 


I 


«> 


£      SI 


was  a  holy  Spirit ;  and  that  whatever  language  they 
mii»ht  hold  with  respect  to  himself,  blasphemy 
against  that  power  by  which  he  did  those  miracles 
would  not  be  forj^iven.  "  All  manner  of  sins  and 
blasphemy  shall  be  forgiven  unto  men ;  but  the 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be 
forgiven  unto  men.  And  whosoever  speaketh 
against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be  forj^iven  him  : 
but  whosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world, 
nor  in  the  world  to  come." 

Were  the  words  *'  all  manner  of  blasphemy," 
in  the  pjissag(^  in  question,  received  as  including 
blas[)hemy  against  tho  Father,  the  term  must  be 
thus  understooij  :  '*  All  manner  of  blasphemy 
against  man  and  tho  Father,  and  even  blasphemy 
against  the  Son,  .--Ihill  he  t'ori^iven;  but  blasphrmy 
against  the  J  Inly  (ihost  nujst  not  be  forgiven  :" 
and  cons(»qn(mtiy  the  interpretation  would  amount 
to  an  arbnission  of  the  sup- riority  of  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  to  tlu;  Father,  an  opinion 
whicfi  no  sect  of  (Uiristians  has  liithj^rto  formed. 
In  the  above-qiiolnd  passage,  I h(»refore,  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Holy  (ihost  musi  exclude  blasphemy 
against  the  Father,  and  th«'  whole  should  be  thus 
interpreted  : — All  manner  of  blasphemy  against 
men  and  angels,  even  against  the  first-born  of 
every  creature,  shall  be  forgiven  ;  but  blasphemy 
against  the  power  of  God,  by  which  Jesus  de- 
clared himself  to  have  cast  out  devils,  shall  not  be 
forgiven.     For  further  illustration  I  quote  here  the 


236 


I    i 


whole  passage  of  Matthew,  ch.  xii.  vers.  24—37 : 
<*  But   vvlien  the    Pharisees  heard   it,    they   said. 
This  feHow  doth  not  cast  out  devils,  but  by  Beel- 
zebub, the  [)rince  of  the  devils.    And  Jesus  knew 
their  thouohts,  and  said   unto  them.  Every  king- 
dom  (livi(hMl  ajrjiiust  itself  is  broui^^ht  to   desola- 
tion ;  and    evrry  city  or  house  dividend   against  it- 
self shall  no!  stand.    And  if  ^atan  cast  out  Satan, 
he  is  divided  a^rniiist  himself;  how  shall  then  his 
kinir(h»m  stand  ?   And  if  1  by  Becdzebub  cast  out 
devils,  by  whom  do  your  children  cast  them  out  ? 
therefore  thry  shidi  be  your  jtnlges.      But  if  I  cast 
out  devils  by  th(^  Spirit  of  God,  thru  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  come    unto  you.     Or  else  how  can  one 
enter    intt)  a  stroma   m.m's   house    and    spoil   his 
goods,  except  he  first  bind  the  strong  man  ?  and 
then  he  will  spoil  his  house.     lie  that  is  not  with 
nie  is  against  me  ;  and  he  that  gnthereth  not  with 
me  scattereth  itbroad.      VVheretbre  I  say  unto  you, 
All  manner  (»f  sin  and  bl.M>phemy  shall  be  forgiven 
unto  men  ;  but  the   bla>|>hemy   against  the   Holy 
Ghost  shall  not  be  for-iiven  unto  men.     And  who- 
soever s[)eak(Mh  ii  word  auainst  the  Jr^on  of  man,  it 
shall  be    Ibroivtu    liim  :   but    whosoever  sp(iak<Jth 
against   the^'lblv  (ihust,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven 
him,  neither  in  iln     Wi>rld,  neither  in  the  world  to 
come.      Eith«  r   make  the   tree  good,  and  his   fruit 
good  ;  or  else  make  the  tree  corrupt,  and  his  fruit 
corrupt  :   for  the   tree  is  known   by  his  fruit.     O 
generatiori  of  vipers,  how  can  ye,  being  evil,  speak 
good  things?  for  out  of  the    abundance  of  the 


J 


heart  the  mouth  speakcth.  A  good  man  out  of 
the  good  treasure  of  the  heart  bringeth  forth  good 
thinors  :  and  an  evil  man  out  of  the  evil  treasure 
bringeth  forth  evil  things.  But  I  say  unto  you, 
That  every  idle  word  thai  men  shall  speak,  they 
shall  give  a<^*.coimt  tht^n^of  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. For  by  thy  words  thou  shah  b  •  justified, 
and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  condemned." 
Mark,  ch.  iii.  vers.  29,  :30  :  "  But  he  that  shall 
blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  never  for- 
giveness, but  is  in  danger  of  (Jternal  damnation  : 
because  they  said,   He  hath  an  unclean  spirit." 

Is  it  not  evident  from  th(*  above  autftority  of 
Jesus  himself,  that  the  term  "  Holy  Ghost"  is 
synonymous  to  the  prevailing  influence  of  God  ? 
And  had  not  the  power  by  which  Jesus  perfortned 
his  miracles  the  same  oriirin,  and  was  it  not  of 
the  same  nature,  as  that  by  which  the  children  of 
Israel  performer!  theirs?  "  if  I  by  Beelzebub  cast 
out  devils,  by  whom  do  your  children  cast  them 
out  ?  therefore  th<*y  shall  be  your  judges."  It 
may  not  be  without  use  to  notice  here,  that  fre- 
quent  instances  are  related  in  the  Scriptures  of 
the  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  in  hjading 
righteous  men  to  truth,  bef»)re  J(\sus  had  com- 
meneed  the  perform  iiK^e  of  his  divine  commission, 
and  even  beforci  he  had  a[)p(iared  in  this  world  ; 
in  the  same  manner  as  it  afterwards  operated  in 
cTuidiuir  his  true  fidlowers  to  the  way  of  God,  sub- 
seqtient  to  his  ascent  to  heaven,  in  consequence 
of    his    repeated    intercession    with    the    Father. 


^ 


238 


239 


This  will  fully  appear  from  the  following  passages, 
Luke,  ch.  i.  ver.  15  :  "  And  he  (John  the  Baptist) 
shall  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  even  from  his 
mother's  womb."     Ver.   41  :    "  And  it  came  to 
pass,  that  when  Elizabeth  heard  the  salutation  of 
Mary,  the  babe  leaped  in  her  womb ;  and  Eliza- 
beth was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost."     Ver.  67  : 
"  And  his  (John's)  father  Zacharias  was  filled  with 
the    Holy  Ghost,  and  prophesied,"  &c.      Ch.  ii. 
vers.  25,  26  :  "  And   behohl,  there  was  a  man  in 
Jerusalem,  whose  name   was  Simeon  ;    and   the 
same   man  was  just  and   devout,  waiting  for  the 
consolation  of  Israel;  and   the   Holy   Ghost  was 
upon  him.     And  it  was  revealed  unto  him  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  that  he  should   not  see  death,  before 
he  had  seen  the   Lord's  Christ.     And  he  came  by 
the  Spirit  into  the  tem[)le."   Marl!,  ch.  xii.  ver.  36. 
"David   himself  said    by   the    Holy   Ghost,   The 
Lord  said  to  my  Lord,  Sit  thou  on  my  right  hand, 
til     I    make  thine   enemies  thy    footstool."     The 
Evangelist  Matthtnv  (Muploys  a  similar  expression, 
ch.  xxii.  ver.  43:  **  How  iIkmi  doth  David  in  spirit 
call  him    Lord  ?"     Lithe,   ch.   iv.   ver.   1  :  "  And 
Jesus,  being  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  returned  from 
Jordan,  and  was  led  by  the  Spirit  into  the  wilder- 
ness."    It  must  not,  therefore,  be  supposed,  that 
the  manifestation  of  this   holy  attribute  of  God, 
is  peculiar  to   the   Christian    dispensation.     We 
find  in  the  Scriptures  the  term  "  God"    applied 
figuratively  in  a  finite  sense  to  Christ,  and  to  some 
other  superiors,  as  I  have  already  noticed  in  page 


169:    a  circumstance  which  may   possibly  have 
tended  to  confirm  such  as  are  rendered  from  their 
early   impressions  partial  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,   in    their    prepossessed    notions  of    the 
deity  of  Jesus.      But  with  respect  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  I  must  confess  my  inability  to  find  a  single 
passage   in    the  whole  Scriptures,  in  which  the 
Spirit  is  addressed  as  God,  or  as  a  person  of  God, 
so  as  to  afford   to  believers  of  the  Trinity  an  ex- 
cuse for  their  profession  of  the  Godhead  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.     The   only  authorities  they  quote  to 
this  effect  that  I  have  met  with  are  as  follow  :  Acts 
ch.  v.    vers.   3,  4  :     "  Peter  said,   Ananias,  why 
hath  Satan  filled  thine  heart  to  lie  to  the   Holy 
Ghost  ?  Thou  hast  not  lied  to  men,  but  unto  God." 
From  which  they  conclude.  He  that  lieth  to  the 
Holy  Ghost,  lieth  to  God.     John,  ch.  xv.  ver.  26  : 
"  But  when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will 
send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of 
truth,  who  proceedeth   from  the  Father,   he  will 
testify  of  me."     As  to  the  first  of  these  texts,  I 
need  only  remark,   that  any    sin   or    blasphemy 
against  one  of  the  attributes  of  God  is  of  course 
reckoned  a  sin  or  blasphemy  against  God  himself 
But  this  admission  amounts  neither  to  a  recogni- 
tion of  the  self-existence  of  the  attribute,    nor  of 
its  identity  with  God.     With  respect  to  the  mis- 
sion of  the  Spirit  of  truth  as  a  proof  of  its  being  a  se- 
parate existence,  and  not  merely  an  expression  for 
the  influence  of  God,  the  passage  in  question,  if  so 
taken,  will  thus  run :  "  But  when  God  is  come,  whom 
1  (God)  will  send  unto  you  from  God,  even  God  who 


ii 


K 


249 

procedeth  from  God,"  &c.  Can  there  be  an  idea 
more  polytheistical  than  what  flows  from  these 
words  ?  Yet  those  that  maintain  this  interpretation 
express  their  detestation  of  Polytheism.  If  with 
a  view  to  soften  the  unreasonableness  of  this  m- 
terpretation,  they  think  themselves  justified  in 
having  recourse  to  the  term  "  mystery,"  they  can- 
not without  injustice  accuse  Hindoos,  the  believers 
of  numerous  Gods  under  one  Godhead,  of  ab- 
surdity, when  they  plead  mystery  in  defence  of 
their  Polytheism  ;  for  under  the  plea  of  mystery, 
every   appearance  of    unreasonableness    may  be 

easily  removed. 

I  find  to  my  great  surprise,  that  the  y)lural  form 
of  expression  in  the  26th  verse  of  the  first  chapter 
of  Genesis,  "  And  God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in 
our  image,  after  our  likeness,"  has  been  quoted  by 
some  divines  as  tending  to  prove  the  doctrine  of 
the  Deity  of  the   Holy  Ghost,  and    that  of  the 
Son,   with  the  deity  of  the    Father  of  the  uni- 
verse, commonly  called  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 
It  could  scarcely  be  believed,  if  the  fact  were  not 
too  notorious  that  such   eminent  scholars  as  some 
of  those  divines  undoubtedly  were,  could  be  liable 
to  such  a  mistake,  as  to  rely  on   this  verse    as   a 
ground  of   argument  in  support  of   the  Trinity. 
It  shows  how  easily  prejudice   in  favour  of  an  al- 
ready acquired  opinion  gets  the  better  of  learning, 
and    how  successfully  it  darkens   the  sphere  of 
truth.        Were    we    even    to    disregard     totally 
the  idiom  of   the   Hebrew,   Arabic,   and  of  al- 


t: 


# 


f 


241 

most  all  Asiatic  languages,  in  which  the  plural 
number  is  often  used  for  the  singular,  to  express 
the  respect  due  to  the  person  denoted  by  the  noun: 
and  to  understand  the  term,    "  our  image"  and 
"  our  likeness,"  found  in  the  verse  as  conveying  a 
plural  meaning,  the  quotation  would  still  by  no 
means  answer  their  purpose ;    for  the   verse  in 
question  would   in   that  case  imply  a  plurality  of 
Gods,  without  determining  whctlier  their  number 
was  three  or  three  hundred,  and  c>f  course  with- 
out specifying  their  persons. — No  njidtl'.e  print  in 
the  unlimited  series  of  number  being  determined, 
it  would  be   almost  necess^ary   for  l!i'»  purpose  of 
obtaining  some  fixed  inmiber,  as  implii-d  by  those 
terms,  to  adopt  either  two,  the  loN/est  degree  of 
plurality  in  the  first  personal  pronoun  ''Oth  in  He- 
brew and   Arabic,  or  to  take  the  !ii»:ln'St  number 
of  Gods  with  which  human   imaginaiion  has  peo- 
pled the  heavens.     In  the  former  2ase  the  verse 
cited  miirht  countenance  the  doctrine  of  the  du- 
ality  of  the  Godhead  entertained  by  Zirdusht  and 
his  followers,  representing  the  God  of  goodness, 
and  the  God  of  evil,  to  have  jointly  created  man, 
composed  of  a  mixed  nature  of  good  and  evil  pro- 
j)ensities  ;  in  the  latter  it  would  be  consistent  with 
the  Hindoo  system  of  religion  ;  but  ihoTc  is  no- 
thing in  the  words,  that  can   be  with  any  justice 
construed   as  pointing   to   Trinity.       These    are 
not  the  only  difficulties  attending  the  interpre- 
tation of  those  terms  : — if  they  should  be  viewed 
in  any  other  than  a  singular  sense,  they  would  in- 

^4 


Hi 


V 


H 


1    J 

i 


212 

volve  contradiction  with  the  very  next  verse  :  "  So 
God  created  man  in  his  own  image  ;"  in  which  the 
singular  number  is  distinctly  used  :  as  in  Dcut. 
eh.  iv.  ver.  4  :  **  The  Lord  our  God  is  ont  Lord  ?" 
and  also  with  the  spirit  of  tlie  whole  of  the  Old 
Testamcmt. 

To  those  who  are  tolerably  versed  in  Hebrew 
and  Arabic,  (which  is  only   a  refined  Hebrew,)  it 
is  a  well  known  fact,  that  in  the  Jewish  and  Mo- 
hummudan  Scriptures,  as  well  as  in  common  dis- 
course, the  plural  form  is  often  used  in  a  singular 
sense  when  the  superiority  of  the  subject  of  dis- 
course is  intended  to  be  kept  in  view  :   this  is  suf- 
ficiently apparent  from  the  following  ([notations 
taken  both  from  the  OKI  Testament  in  Hebrew,and 
from   the  Qoran.       Exodus,  ch.  x\i.  ver.  4,  In 
the   origiual  Hebrew  Scripture  n='«  ^^  P'  ^'J-^^*  =^     "  If 
his  masters  (meaning  his  master)  have  given  him  a 
wife."     Verse  G,  Hebrew,  ^^^^^^^  ^«  ^^J^«  ^'^'^^^^  '•  Then 
his  masters  (that  is,   his  master)   shall  bring  him 
unto  the  Judges."     Verse  29lh,  v-v^a npni dk'^c^ Sonc  wn 
njjj-»irDK^  **  But  if  the   ox  wi^re  wont  to  pu^h  with 
his  horn  in  time  past,  and  it  has  been  testified  to 
his  cwners,"  (that  is  to  his  i»w  ner). — haiali,  ch.  vi. 
ver.  H   Hebrew,  ^j"*  t'  '=^  "^>^^ '°  '^*'  **  To  whom  shall  I 
send  ?  and  who  will  go  for  us  ?"  (that  is,  for  me.) 
So  also  in  the  Qoran,  "  We  are  (meaning  I  am) 
nearerlhanihi  JMgnlarvc  in."  "(Surely  we  meaning 
I)  created  every  thing  in  prop(»rtion."   In  these  two 
texts  of  the  Uoran,  God  i.-  reprosefited  to  have  spo- 


I 


r 

Mi 


24:^ 

ken  in  the  plural  number,  although,  Mohummud 
cannot  be  supposed  to  have  employed  a  mode  of 
expression  which  he  could  have  supposed  capable 
of  being  considered  favourable  to  the  Trinity. 

But  what  arc  wc3  to  think  of  such  reasoning  as 
that  which  finds  a  confirmation  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  in  the  thrice  re[)j^ated  term  '*  holy,"  in 
verse  o,  chapter  vi.  oi^Imiak?  Following  this  mode 
of  argument,  the  repetitions  of  the  term  **  Kli, 
Eli,"  or"  \lyG()d,  my  God,"  by  Jesus  in  his  hu- 
man nature,  in  /!//////// /r,  eh.  xwii.  ver.  46,  equally 
establishes  the  (juality  of  th<^  God.  So  also  the 
holy  name  of  <he  Su[>renie  Deity  hiAn^  composed 
of  fom*  letters,  in  the?  Ueb^^'W,  Greek,  Latin,  Ara- 
bic, and  Simscrit,  clearly  denoti's  tln^  qn-idrality  of 
theGodlhnid  !  !  !  but  tliese  and  all  sitnilar  modes 
of  argmnent  that  have  been  resorted  to,  are  wor- 
thy of  notice  otdy  as  thc^y  serve  to  exhibit  the 
extraordinary  force  of  prejudice  and  supersti- 
tion. 

The  most  extraordinary  circumstance  is,  that 
some  should  quote  in  the  support  of  the  Trinity 
the  following  senten<e  :  "  For  there  are  three  that 
bear  record  in  heaven,  the  Father,  the  Word,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  an<l  these  thret»  ate  one  ;"  repre- 
senting it  as  th(j  7th  verse,  diaf).  v.  of  the  first 
epistle  of  John.  This  is  suj)posHd  to  have  been 
at  first  composed  as  a  parafihrase  upon  what 
stands  as  verse  8th  of  the  same  chapter,  (**  and 
there  are  three  that  bear  witness  in  earth,  the 
Spirit,  and  the  water,  and  the   blood  ;  and  these 


\; 


/' 


«         M 

'll 


M 


><i 


I 


..  h 


244 

three  agree  in  one,"  and  met  with  approbation.  It 
was  however  for  a  length  of  time  known  only  in 
oral  circulation  ;  but  was  afterwards  placed  in  the 
margin   of    some  editions,  and  at  last   introdu- 
ced into  the   text,  most  probably  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  as  an  original  verse.     From   that   time 
it  has  been    the  common  practice   to  insert  this 
verse  amongst  those  which  are  collected   in  sup- 
port of  the    JVinitarian  doctrine.     It    may  have 
served  in  this  way  to  confirm  and  strengihen  pre- 
judice,   though  few  biblical  critics  ever  attached 
the  smallest  value  to  it   either  way.     This  inter- 
pretation is  so  modern,  and  so  obvious,  that  seve- 
ral    Irinitj.rian   Editors  and    Commentators   of 
the  Bible,  suih  asGriesbach  and  Michaelis,  (who 
never  allowed  their  zeal  for  their  sect  to  overcome 
the  prudence  (uid  candour  with  which  they  were 
endowed,)  have  omitted   to  insert  it  in  their  late 
works  on  the  New  Testament  ;  knowing  perhaps 
that  such  an  interpolation,  so  far  from  strensrthen- 
ing  the  doctrine  they  maintain,  has  excited  great 
doubts  as  to  the  accuracy  of  other  passages  gene- 
rally relied  upon  for  \u  support. 

We  have  already,  I  trust,  seen  distinctly  that 
none  of  the  lessons  taught  by  Christ  to  his  disci- 
ples teach  us  to  believe  in  him  as  God  ;  but  as 
most  I  rinitarian  auihurs  assert  that  this  doctrine 
was  fully  revealed  by  his  Apostles  speaking  under 
the  ins[)iration  of  the  llt>ly  Ghost,  it  may  be  worth 
while  to  examine  whether  it  be  included  by  them 
amongst  the   doctrines  of  the  Christian  religion. 


i 

i 


f 


243 


This  question  maybe  immediately  determined  by 
referring  to  the  hi.<lory  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles ;  for  if  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  had  been 
considered  by  them  as  an  essential  part  of  what 
they  were  commanded  to  teach,  we  should  certainly 
find  it  insisted  upon  in  the  discourses  they  address- 
ed to  their  converts.  Cut  we  shall  look  in  vain  for 
any  expression  amongst  those  reported  by  Luke, 
that  indicates  the  profession  of  such  a  belief  by 
the  Apostles  themselves  ;  far  less  that  they  ex- 
acted an  acknowledgment  of  its  truth,  from  those 
whom  thc^y  admitted  by  the  rite  of  Baptism  into 
the  faith  of  (>hristianity. 

Acts,  ch.  ii.  ver.  22  :  "  Ye  men  of  Israel,  hear 
these  words  ;  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  a  man  approved 
of  God  among  you  by  miracles  and  wonders  and 
signs,  which  God  did  by  him  in  the  midst  of  you, 
as  ye  yourselves  also  know  ;"  32,  "  This  Jesus 
hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we  all  are  witnesses." 
36,  "  Therefore  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know 
assuredly,  that  (lod  hath  made  that  same  Jesus, 
whom  ye  have  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ." 
Ch.  iii.  vers.  22  and  23:  "  For  Mo*<es  truly  said  unto 
the  Fathers,  a  Prophet  shall  the  Lord  your  God 
raise  up  unto  you  of  your  brethren,  like  unto  me ; 
him  shall  ye  hear  in  all  things,  whatsoever  he  shall 
say  unto  you.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 
every  soul  which  will  not  hear  that  Prophet,  shall 
be  destroyed  from  among  the  people."  Ch.  iv. 
ver.  12 :  "  Neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other ; 
for  there  is  none  other  name  under  heaven  given 


\ 


(' 


24G 


247 


among  men,  whereby  we  must  be  saved."     Vers. 
2G  and   27  :  "  The  kings  of  the  eartli   stood  up, 
and  the  rulers  were  gathered  together  against  the 
Lord,    and    against  his  Christ.     For  of  a   truth 
against  thy   holy  child  Jesus,    whom    thou    hast 
anointed,"     &c.    Ch.  v.  ver.  31  :  "Him  has  God 
exalted  with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a 
Saviour,  for  to  give  repentance  to  Israel,  and  for- 
giveness of  sins."  Ch.   vii.  ver.  56  :  "  And  said, 
behold  I   see  the    heavens  open,   and  the  Son  of 
man  standing  on  the  right  hand  of  God."  Ch.  viii. 
vers.  37  and  38  :  "And  Philip  said,   If  thou  be- 
lievest  with  all  ihifie  heart,  thou  niayest.     And  he 
answered  and  said,  I  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
the  Son  of  God.     And  he  commanded  the  chariot 
to  stand  still  :  and  they  went  down  both  into  the 
water,  both  Philifiand  the  eunuch  ;  and  he  bapti- 
sed him."     Ch.  X.  ver.  3«  :  "  How  God  anointed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with 
power."     Ver.  42  :  **  And  hr  commanded  us  to 
preach  unto  the  people,   and  to  testily  that  it  is  he 
who  was  onlained  of  (lodto  be  the  Judge  of  quick 
and  dead."     Ch.  xiii.  ver.  38  :  ''  Be  it  known  unto 
you  therefore,  men  and  brethren,  that  through  this 
man  is  pieach(;d  unto  you  the  forgiveness  of  sins." 
Ch.  xvii.    ver.  3  :  "  Opening  and   alleging,   that 
Christ  must  needs  have  suft'ered,  and  risen  again 
from  the    dead  ;    and    that  this  Jesus,   whom   I 
preach  unto  you,  is  i  hrist." 

Thus  we  find  the  Apostle  never  hesitated  to  ha- 
zard their  lives  by  declaring  before  the  Jews  that 


their  master  was  a  Prophet,  the  expected  Messiah, 
the  Son  of  the  living  God  :  which  was  equally  of- 
fensive to  their  countrymen,  as  if  they  had  called 
him  God  himself ;  yet  in  none  of  the  Sermons  do 
we  ever  find  them  representing  him  as  the  true 
God.     In  the  same  manner,  Jesus  himself  never 
assumed  that  character  to  himself,   although  he 
repeatedly  avowed  that  he  was  the  Messiah,  the 
Son  of  God,  whereby  he  knew  that  according  to 
their  law  he  would  draw  the  penalty  of  death  upon 
himself.     As  to  the  nature  of  those  doctrines  of 
Christianity  deemed  essential  in  the  earliest  times, 
I  shall  content  mvself  wMth  makinjj  a  few  extracts 
from  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Mosheim,  a  ce- 
lebrated author  anions  Trinitarians,    which  will 
prove  that  the  doctrine  of  theTrinity,  so  zealously 
maintained  as    fundamental   by  the  generality  of 
modern  Christians,  made  not  its  appearance  as  an 
essential,  or  even  a  secondary  article  of  Christian 
faith,  until  the  commencement  of  the  fourth  centu- 
ry ;  and  then  it  was  introduced  after  long  and  vio- 
lent discussions  by  the   majority  of  an  assembly, 
who  were  supported  by  the  authority  of  a  monarch. 
Mosheim,  Vol.  I.  p.  100  :  "  Nor  in  this  first  centu- 
ry was  the  distinction  made  between  Christians  of 
a  more  or  less  perfect  order  which  took  place  af- 
terwards :  whoever  acknowledi^ed  Christ  as  the 
Saviour  of  mankind,  and  made  solemn  profession 
of  his  confidence  in  him,  w^as  immediately  bapti- 
sed, and  received  into  the    Church."     P.   411  : 
''  Soon  after  its  commencement,  even  in  the  year 
il?,  anew  contention  arose  in  Egypt  upon  a  sub- 


i. 


24^ 

ject  of  much  higher  importance,  and  with  conse- 
quences of  a  yet  more  pernicious  nature  ;  the  sub- 
ject of  this  fatal  controversy,   which  kindled  such 
deplorable     division    throughout    the     Christian 
worhl,  was  the   doctrine  of  three  persons  of  tlH3 
Godhead  ;  a  doctrine  which  in  the  three  preceding 
centuries,  had  happily  escaped  the  vain  curiosity 
of  human    researches,  and   lieen    left   undefined 
and  undetermined  by  any  particidar  set  of  ideas. 
The  Church  indeed  had  frequently  decided  against 
the  Sabt'llians  and  oiht  rs,  that  there  was  a  real 
difference   between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and 
that  the  Huly  Ghost  was  distinct  from  them  both  ; 
or  as  we  commoidy  speak,  that  three  distinct  per- 
sons exist  in  the  Deity  ;  but  the  mutual  relation  of 
these  persons  to  each  other,  and  the  nature  of  the 
distinction  that  stibsists  between  them,  are  matters 
that  hitherto  were  neitlier  disputed  nor  explained, 
with  respect  to  which  the  Chunh  had  co!isequently 
observed  a  profound  silence  :— nothing  was   de- 
clared to  the  faith  of  the  Christians  in  this  matter, 
nor  were  there  any  modes  of  expression  prescribed 
as  requisite  to  be  used  in  s[>eaking  of  the  mystery. 
Hence  it  happened,  that  the  Christian  doctors  en- 
tertained  different  sentiments  upon   this   subject 
without  giving  the  least  offence,  and  discoursed 
variously  concerning  the  distinction  between  Fa- 
ther, Son,  and  the  Htily  Ghost,  each  one  following 
his  respective  opinion    with  the   utmost  liberty." 
On  this  quotation  1  beg  leave  to  remark,  that  if,  in 
the  first  and  purest  ages  of  Christianity,  the  fol- 
lowers of  Christ  entertained  such  different  opinions 


249 

on  the  subject  of  the  distinction  between  Fathef? 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  without  incurring  thecharge 
of  heresy  and  heterodoxy,  and  without  even  break- 
inir  the   tie  of  Christian  affection    towards   each 
other,  it  is  a  melancholy  contrast  that  the  same 
freedom  of  opinion  on  this  subject  is  not  now  al- 
lowed, nor  the  same  muttial  forbearance  maintain- 
ed amongst  those  who  call  themselves  Christians. 
Moshiem,  p.  412  :  "  In  an  assembly  of  Presbyters 
of  Alexandria,  the   Bishop  of   that  city,   whose 
name  was  Alexander,  expressed  his  sentiments  on 
this  head  with  a  high  degree  of  freedom  and  con- 
fidence, and  maintained  among  other  things,   that 
the  Son  was  not  only  of  the  same  eminence  and 
dignity,  but  also  of  the  same  essence  with  the  Fa- 
ther :  this  assertion  was  opposed  by  Arius,  one  of 
the  presbyters,  a  man  of  a  subtile  turn,  and  re- 
markable for   his  eloquence."     Page 41 4:  "The 
Emperor  Constantino,  looking  upon  the  subject  of 
this  controversy  as  a  matter  of  small  importance, 
and  as  little  connected  with  the  fundamental  and 
essential  doctrines  of  religion,  contented  himself 
at  first  with  addressing  a  letter  to  the  contending 
parties,  in  which  he  admonished  them  to  put  an 
end    to  their  disputes ;  but  when  the  Prince  saw 
that  his  admonitions  were  without  effect,  and  that 
troubles  and  commotions,   which  the  passions  of 
men  too  often  mingle  with  religious  disputes,  were 
spreading  and    increasing  daily  throughout   the 
empire,  he  assembled  at  length,  in  the  year  825, 
the  famous  Council  of  Nice  in  Bithynia,  wherein 

35 


\ 


», 


A 


N^ 


.H 


250 

the  deputies  of  the  Church  Universal  were  sum 
moned  to  put  an  end  to  this  controversy.     In  this 
general  council,  after  many  keen  debates  and  vio- 
lent efforts  of  the  two  parties,  the  doctrine  of  Anus 
was  condemned  ;  Christ  declared   consubstantial 
or  of  the  same  essence  with  the  Father  ;  the  van- 
quished Presbyter  banished  amonff  the  Illyrians, 
and  his  followers  compelled  to  give  their  assent  to 
the  creed  or  confession  of  faith  whic  i  was  compo- 
sed by  this  cvamcil."     It  must  not  escape  the  no- 
tice of  my  readers,  that  so  late  as  the  year  314, 
the  doctrine  of  the  Son  being  of  the  same  nature 
with  the  Father,   was  supposed  to  be  a  matter  of 
small  importance,  and   little  connected  with  the 
fundamental  and  essential  doctrines  of  religion. 

The  reason  for  the  majority  being  in  favour  of 
the  three  persons  of  the  Goilhead  at  the  Council 
of  Nice,  may  be  easily  accounted  for,  as  I  noticed 
before.     More  than  nine  tenths  of  the  Christians 
of  that  age,  including   the  emperor  and  princes, 
were  Gentile  converts,  to  whom  the  idea  of  a  plu- 
rality of  (iods  was  most  familiar  and  acceptable, 
and  to  whose  reason  as  well  as  practice  the  wor- 
ship of  a  deity  in  the  human  shape  was  perfectly 
consonant,  as  appears  from  the  following  quota- 
tion, as  well  as  from  ihe  Roman  and  Grecian  his- 
tories.    Moshiem,  [Vol.  I.]  p.  ^25  ;  "  The  deities 
of  almost  all  nations  were  either  ancient  heroes 
renowned  for  noble  exploits  and  worthy  deeds,  or 
kin'Ts  and  crenerals  who  had  founded  empires,  or 
women  become  illustrious  by  remarkable  actions  or 


4      4- 


•I 


n 


fT^ 


J51 

useful  inventions  :  the  merit  of  these  distinguish 
ed   and  eminent  persons,  contemplated  by  their 
posterity  with  an  enthusiastic  gratitude,  was  the 
reason  of  their  being  exalted  to  celestial  honours." 
We  find  also  in  the  Acts  of  the    Apostles,  Paul 
declared  to  be  God  by  the  people  of  Melita,  and 
both  Paul  and  B  irnabas  regarded  as  gods  by  the 
inhabitants  of    Lystra  ;  and    the    Saviour     was 
ranked  in  the  number  of  false  gods  even  by   pro- 
fessed heathens.     Acts,  ch  xxviii.  ver.  6  :  **  IIow- 
beit   they    l(K)k(M!   uhen  he   (Paul)  should    have 
swollen  or  falhii  down  tieud  suddenly  ;  but  after 
they  had  looked  a  great  while,   and  saw  no  harm 
come  to  him,  they  changud  iheir  minds,  and  said 
he  was  a  Goil."     Acf^,  ch.  xiv.    ver.    II:"  The 
gods  are  come  down  to  us  in  the  likeness  of  men." 
Moshiem,  [Vol.  I.]  p.  65  :  "Many  who  were  not 
willing   to  adopt  the   whole  of  the  doctrines  of 
Christianity,  were  nevertheless,  as  appears  from 
undoubted  records,  so  struck  with  the  account  of 
his  life  and  actions,  and  so  charmed  with  the  sub- 
lime purity  of  his   precepts,  that  they  numbered 
him  (Jesus)  among  the  greatest  heroes,  nay  even 
among  the  gods  themselvi'S."     Page  66  ;  "  So  il- 
lustrious was  the  fame  of  Christ's  power  grown 
after  his  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  the  mi- 
raculous gifts  shed  from  on  high  upon  his  apostles, 
that  the  Emperor  Tiberius  is  said  to  have  propo- 
sed his  being  enrolled  among  the  gods  of  Rome, 
which  the  opposition  of  the  senate  hindered  from 
taking  effect."     If  some  of  the  Heathens  from  the 
nature  of  iheir  superstitions   could    rank   Jesus 


\i 


I 


i 


v 


M 


I' I" 


iH 


I 

among  their  false  gods,  it  is  no  wonder  if  others, 
when  nominally  converted  to  Christianity,  should 
have  placed  him  on  an  equality  with  the  true  God, 
mnd  should  have  passed  a  decree,  constitutmg  him 
one  of  the  persons  of  the  Godhead.     These  facts 
coincide  entirely  with  my  own  firm  persuasion  of 
the  impossibility,  that  a  doctrine  so   inconsistent 
with  the   evidence  of  the  senses  as  that  of  three 
persons  in  one  being,  should  ever  gain  the  sincere 
assent  of  any  one,  into  whose  mind  it  has  not  been 
instilled  in  early  education.     Early  impressions 
alone  can  induce  a  Christian  to  believe  that  three 
are  one,  and  one  is  three ;  just  as  by  the  same 
means  a  Hindoo  is  made  to  believe  thatmilhons  arc 
one,  and  one  is  millions  ;  and  to  imagine  that  an 
inanimate  idol  is  a  living  substance,  and  capable 
of  assuming  various  forms.     As  I  have  sought  to 
attain  the  truths  of  Christianity  from  the  words 
of  the  author  of  this  religion,  and  from  the  undis- 
put.id   iiiMructions   of  his  holy  apostles,  and  not 
from  a  parent  «)r  tutor,  I  cannot  help   refusing  my 
assenttoHny  doctrine  which  I  do  not  find  scriptural. 
Before  concluding,  1  b(!g  to  revert  to  one  or  two 
arguments  respecting  the  nature  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  have  been  already  partly  touched  upon.    It 
is  niiiintained   that  his  nature  was  double,  being 
divine  as  ^on  of  God,  and  human  as  S^on  of  man 
^that  in  the  former  capacity  he   perfornie<l  mira- 
cles an<l  t'xerciscd  autliority  over  the  wind  and  the 
sea,  an.  as  man  was  sul-jr-ct  to  and  experienced 
human  feelings,  joy  and  sorrow,  pleasure  and  pain. 


iu;) 


I 

it 


s 


Is  it  possible  to  consider  a  being  in  the  human  shape, 
acting  daily  in  a  manner  required  by  the  nature  of  the 
human  race  as  the  invisible  God,  above  mortality 
and  all  the  feelings  of  mortal  beings,  from  a  mere 
figurative  application  of  the  terms  "  Son  of  God" 
or  "  God,"  to  him,  and  from  the  circumstance  of 
his  performing  wonderful  works  contrary  to  the 
usual  course  of  nature  ?     If  so,  what  can  prevent 
one  from  esteeming  Moses  and  others,   as  pos- 
sessed of  both  divine  and  human  nature?  since 
Moses  likewise  is  called   God  distinctly.    (Exo- 
dus,   ch.    vii.    ver.  1  :      "I   have   made    thee   a 
God  to  Pharaoh;")  and  he  is  also  called   man, 
("  wherewith  Moses,  the  man  of  God,  blessed  Is- 
rael." Devi.  ch.  xxxiii   ver.  1  ;)  and  consequent- 
ly it  may  be  alleged,  that  in  his  divine  capacity, 
Moses   performed   miracles,  and  commanded  the 
heavens  and  the  earth.   (*^  Give  ear,  O  ye  heavens, 
and  I  will  speak  ;  and  hear,  ()  earth,  the  words  of 
my  mouth,")    Deaf,  ch.  xxxii.  ver.  1 :   ''  For  it  (the 
word  of  Moses)  is  not  a  vain   thing  for  you,  be- 
cause It  is  your  life:'  ver.  47  ;)  and  that  in   his 
human  capacity,  he  suffered  death  and  other  mise- 
ries.   Neither  Jesus  nor  Moses  ever  declared,  "I 
say  so,  and  perform  this  as  God  ;  and  I  say  so,'and 
perform  ihat  as  man."  If  wc  give  so  great  a  latitude 
to  the  modes  of  reasoning  employed  to  justify  the 
idea  of  one  being  possessed  of  two  sorts  of  con- 
sciousness, as  God  and  man  ;  two  sorts  of  minds, 
divine  and  hinnan  ;  and  two  sets  of  souls  eternal 
ftnd  perishable  :  then  we  shall  not  onlv  be  at  a 


\^ 


i 


i 


^^^? 


254 

loss  to  know  what  is  rational  and  what  .s  absurd, 
but  shall  find  our  senses  and  experience  of  ht  Ic 
or  no  use  to  us.  The  mode  of  interpreting  the 
Scriptures  which  is  universally  adopted,  is  this, 
that  when  two  terms  seemingly  contradictory  are 
applied  to  one  person,  then  that  which  is  most  con^ 
sistent  with  reason  and  with  the  context  should  be 
k::inaliteral,.andtheotherinaf.guratwe 

sense  Thus  God  is  declare.l  to  be  immaterial, 
and  yet  to  have  hands,  eyes,  &c.  The  latter  ex- 
pression taken  literally,  being  i"-"-'-;,^;^;^ ' 
Lson,  and  with  other  pnssagesof  the  Sc  iptures, 
areunderstuodas  metaphorically  implying  his  pow^ 
er  and  knowlo.lee,  while  the  former  is  interpreted 
nhs  strict  and  literal  sense:  in  like  manner  the 

term  "  Lord  God,"  Reapplied  to  any  other  than 
the  Supreme  Being,  must  be  figuratively  under- 
stood.    Were  any  one,  in  defiance  of  tins  general 
Ide   of  interpretation,  to   insist   that  the  term 
^God,"  applied  to  .lesus,   should  be  taken  in  its 
literal  sense,  and  that  consequently  Jesus  shou  d 
be  actuall  V  considered  God  in  the  human  shape,  he 
would  not  only  acknowledge  the  same  intimate 
ronnexion  of  matter  with  God,  that  exists  between 
matter  and  the  human  soul,  but  also  wouhl  neces- 
sarily justify  the  application  of  such  phrases  as 
fZLofGod-totheVirginMary  and     Bro- 
ther of  God"  to  James  and  others,  which  are  high!} 
derogatory  to  the  character  of  the  Supreme  Author 
o    tl^  unfverse;  and  it  is  the  --^P -^J-- 
lar  to  these  which  has  rendered  the  religion  of  the 


f 


f 


Hindoos  so  grossly  absurd  and  contemptible.  To 
admit  that  all  things,  whether  possible  or  impos- 
sible to  our  understanding,  are  possible  for  God, 
is  certainly  fiivourable  to  the  idea  of  a  mixed  na- 
ture of  God  and  man  :  but  at  the  same  time 
would  be  highly  detrimental  both  to  religion  and 
society  ;  for  all  sorts  of  positions  and  tales,,  how- 
ever impossi  le  they  may  be,  might  in  that  case 
be  advanced  and  supported  on  the  same  plea. 

I  now  conclude  my  reply,   with  noticing   in  a 
brief  manner  the  modes  of  illustration  that  Trini- 
tarians adopt  both  in  conversation  and  in  writing 
in  support  of  the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  in  consis*^ 
tency  with  the  distinction  of  three  persons.     1st ; 
That  as  the  soul,  will,  and  preception,  though  they 
are  three  things,  yet  are  in  fact  one,  so  God  the 
Father,  God  the  Son,  and   God   the   Holy  Ghost, 
though  distinct  persons,  are  to  be  esteemed  as  one. 
Admitting  for  a  moment  the    propriety  of    this 
analogy,  it  serves  to  destroy  totally  their  position, 
as  to  the  three  existences  of  the    Godhead   being 
distinct  substances  ;  for,  according  to  the  estab- 
lished system  of  theology,  the  soul  is  believed  to 
be  the  substance,   and  will  and  perceptions  its 
properties,  which  have  no  distinct  existence  ;  in 
the  same  manner  as  weight  and   locality  are  the 
properties  of  matter,  without  having  existence  as 
separate  substances.     If  this  analogy  then   were 
to  hold  good,  the  Father  would  be  acknowledged 
as  a  separate  existence  like  the  soul,  but  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  must  be  considered  his  attri- 
butes, as  will  and  perception  ale    of  the  soul :  a 


\i] 


y. 


J5G 

doctrine  which  resembles  that  of  the  heretic  Su^ 
beUius  and  the  early  Egyptian  Christians. 

It  is  therefore  necessary,  that,  in  cn<leavouring 
to  prove  the  reasonableness  of  the  idea  respecting 
the  unity  of  three  distinct  substances  of  the  God- 
head, from  comparison  between  them,  and  the  soul, 
and  its  will  and  perception,  they   should  establish 
first  that  the  soul,will,  and   perception,  arc  three 
substances,  and  that  they  are  at  the  same  time  one  ; 
and  then  should  draw  such  an  analogy,  showing 
the  possibility  of  the  position  which  they  assume. 
2ndly    That  as  notwithstanding  the  distinct  ex- 
istence of  the  sun,  his  rays  of  light  and  his  rays 
of  heat,  they  are  considered  as  one  ;  so  God  the 
Father,  God  the  Son,  and   GoiV  the  Holy  Ghost, 
tho-igh   separate  substances,  are  one.     Were  we 
to  ad^mit  the  separate   existence  of  heat,  a  point 
Still  disputed  among  philosophers,  it  would  serve 
as  an  analogy  so  far  as  those  three  distinct  substan- 
ces, though^litierent  in  nature,  are  connected  to- 
gether ;  but  by  no  means  would  answer  the  pur- 
pose of  illustrating  their  position,  that  these  dis- 
tinct persons  are  one  in  nature  and  essence  ;  for 
the  sun  is  acknowledged  to  be  a  compact  body  ; 
rays  of  light  are  fluid   substances  subject  to  ab- 
sorption,  and  frequently   found   emanating  from 
other  bodies,  as  well  as  the  sun  ;  and  h  at,  an 
existence  of  which  the  most  remarkable  property  is 
its  power  of  expanding  other  substances,  is  fre- 
quently unaccompanied  by  the  rays  of  the  sun.  But 
,t  is  universally  acknowledged,  that  whatever  ar- 


I 


\ 


257 

gumeiit  tends  to  prove  a  distinction  between  sub- 
stances, must  necessarily  overturn  their  unity  in  es- 
sence and  existence  ;  and  therefore  the  unity  in  na- 
tureand  essence  which  they  assert  to  exist  in   the 
three  persons  of  the  Godhead  not  being  found  in  the 
sun,  light,  and  heat,  the  analogy  attempted  to  be 
drawn  must  be  abandoned.  Again,  it  is  advanced, 
that  as  a  single  substance  possesses  various  quali- 
ties,  and  consequently   is  viewed   differently  ;  so 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  in  fact 
one  God  ;  yet  the  Deity  in  his  capacity  of  Creator 
of  the  world  is  called  the  Father,  and  in  his  capacity 
of  Mediator  is  termed  the  Son,  in  which  he  is  ge- 
nerally supposed  inferior  to  the  Father  ;  and  in  his 
office  of  sanctification   is  named  the  Holy  Ghost, 
in  which  he  is  deemed  inferior  to  both,      f  know 
not  whether  to  consider  such  an  argurnent  as  rea- 
soning, or  as  a  mockery  of  reason  ;  since  it  justi- 
fies us  in  believing,  that  one  and  the  same  being 
in  one  of  his  capacities  is  superior  to  himself,  and 
again  in  reference  to  another  qualify  is  inferior  to 
himself;  that  he  is  in   one  case  his  own   beloved 
Son,  and  then  in  another  capacity  is  at  the  disposal 
of  himself  according  to  the  entreaty  of  his  Son. 
This  mode  of  arguing,  after  all,  serves  to  deny  the 
Trinity,  which  represents  the  Godhead  as  consist- 
ing of  three  distinct  persons,  and  not  as  one  per- 
son possessing  different  attributes,  which  it  is  the 
object  of  Trinitarians  to  prove.     They  allege  the 
irnited  state  of  the  soul  and  the  bodv  as  analogous 
Ui  the   union  of  the  Father  and  Son  :  but  no^'on- 


i 


•V 


I 


/. 


i 


■JoU 

who  believes  in  the  s  eparate  existence  of  the  soul, 
can  for  a  moment  sup  p-^  se  it  to  be  of  the  same  es- 
sence as  the  body  ;  so  that  unless  they  admit  the 
immateriality  of  the  Father  alone,  and  assert  the 
materiality  of  the  Son  in  his  pre-existent  state, 
this  illustration  also  must  be  set  aside. 

Some  allege,  that  as  the  Son  of  man  designates 
human  nature,  so  the  Son  of  God  expresses  the 
nature  of  God.  Were  we  to  admitthe  term  "  God' 
as  a  common  noun,  and  not  a  proper  name,  and 
Godhea<l  as  a  5:enus  like  mankind,  &c.  and  that 
.Tesus  was  actually  begotten   of  the   Deity,  this 
mode  of  reasonin<r  would  stand  good ;  but  God- 
head must  in  this  case  be  brought  to  a  level  with 
other  genera,  capable  of  performing  animal  func- 
tions, &c. 

Some  represent  God  as  a  compound  substance, 
consisting  ofthrec  parts,  the  Father,  the  ^on,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit,  a  representation  in  support  of 
which  they  can  offer  no  scriptural  authority.     1 
would  however  wish  to  know,  whether  these  parts 
(Father,  Son  and  Spirit)  are  of  the  same  nature 
and  existen<-e,   or  each  possessed  of  a  diflerent 
nature  or  essence.     In   tlie  former  case,    there 
would  b"  ?.  "<tal  impossibility  of  composition  ;  for 
composition  absolutely  requires  articles  or  parts  of 
different  identity  and  essence  ;  nothing  being  ca- 
pable of  composition  with  itself  Besides,  the  idea 
of  such    a  compound  substance  is  inconsistent 
with  that  dictinct  personality  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit,  which  they  maintain.— In  the  latter  case, 
rthat  is,  the  Fatlier.  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit 


k 


» 


being  of  diflerent  natures,)  a  composition  of  these 
three  parts  is  not  impossible  ;  but  it  destroys  the 
opinion  which  they  entertain  respecting  the  Father, 
and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  being  of  the 
same  nature  and  essence,  and  of  course  implies, 
that  the  Godhead  is  liable  to  divisibility. 

The  argument  so  adduced  by  them  would  in- 
clude in  reality  a  denial  of  the  epithet  God  to  each 
part  of  the  Godhead  ;  for  no  portion  of  an  exist- 
ence, either  ideal  or  perceptible  in  a  true  sense, 
can  be  called  the  existence  itself;  as  it  is  one  of 
the  first  axioms  of  abstract  truth,  that  a  part  is  less 
than  the  whole  ;  but  we  find  in  the  Scriptures  the 
Father  constantly  called  God  in  the  strict  and  full 
signification  of  the  term.  John,  ch.  xvii.  ver,  3  : 
"  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  may  know  thee 
the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou 
hast  sent."  1  Cor.  ch.  xv.  ver.  24  :  *' Then  co- 
meth  the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the 
kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father."  1  Cor  ch. 
viii.  ver.  6  :  "To  us  there  is  but  one  God,  the 
Father."  Ephedam,  ch.  iv.  vers.  5, 6  :  "One  Lord, 
one  faith,  one  baptism  ;  one  God  and  Father  of 
all,  who  is  above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you 
all." 

Another  argument  which  has  great  weight  with 
that  sect  is,  that  unless  Jesus  is  God  and  man,  he 
cannot  be  considered  as  qualified  to  perform  the 
oflSce  of  mediator  between  God  and  man  ;  be- 
cause it  is  only  by  this  compound  character  that  he 
intercedes  for  the  guilty  creatures  with  their  oflTend- 


,/ 


260 

ed  God.  This  mode  of  reasoning  is  most  evident-, 
ly  opposed  to  common  sense,   as  well  as  to  the 
Scriptures;  though  their  zeal  in  support    of  ihe 
Trinity  has  not  permitted  them  to  see  it.     1  say, 
opposed  to  common  sense  ;  because  we  observe, 
that  when  anv  one  feels  angry  with  and  inclined  to 
punish  one  of  a    herd  of  cattle  which  may  have 
trespassed  on  his  grounds,  or  when  a  rider  wishes 
TO  chastise  his  horse  on  account  of  its  viciousness, 
it  is  his  friend  or  neighbour  generally  who  inter- 
cedes in  its  behalf,  and  is  successful  in  procuring 
mercy    to  the  oifrnding  animal,  in  his  simple  na- 
ture, without   assuming  in   addition    that   of  the 
crefituu^  in  whose  behalf  he  intercedes.— 1  say,  op- 
posed to  scri]»ture  ;  because  we  find  in  the  sacred 
WTitings,that  Abrahani,  Moses,  and  other  Prophets, 
stood  mediators  and  interceded  successfully  in  be- 
lialf  of  an  offending  people  with   their  oftended 
God  ;  but  none  of  them  possessed  the  double  na- 
ture of  (lod  and  man.     Numb,  ch.  xi.  vers.  1,2; 
**  When  the  people  complained  it  displeased  the 
Lord  ;  as  d  th«^  Lord  heard   it,  and  his  anger  was 
kindled,  and  the  fire  of  the  Lord  burnt  among  them, 
and  consumed  them  that   were   in  the  uttermost 
parts  ot  the  camp.   And  the  people  cried  unto  Mo- 
ses ;  and  when  Moses  prayed  unto  the  Lord,  the 
fire  was  quenched."     Ch.   xiv.  vers.  19,  20,  Mo- 
ses   prayed    to  the    Lord,  "  Pardon,    1   beseech 
thee,    the  iniquity  of  this  people,  acf  nrding  unto 
the  greatness  of  thy  mercy,  and  as  thou   hast  for- 
given this  people,  from  Egypt  even  until  now.   And 
the  Lord  said,   I  have  pardoned  them  according 


>0 


y 
f 


261 

to  thy  word."     Ch.  xxi.  ver.  7  :    "  Therefore  the 
people  came  to  Moses,  and  said.  We  have  sinned, 
for  we  have  spoken  against  the  Lord,  and  against 
thee  :  pray  unto  the  Lord  that  he  take  away  the 
serpents  from  us  :  and  Moses  prayed  for  the  peo- 
ple."    Exod.  ch.  xxxii.   ver.   30  :    "  And  it  came 
to  pass  on  the  morrow,  that  Moses  said    unto  the 
people,  Ye  have  sinned  a  great  sin,  and  now  I 
will  go  up  unto  the  Lord,  peradventure  I  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  your  sins."  Gen,  ch.  xviii. 
ver.  32:  "  And  he  (Abnihnm)  said,  ()  let  not  the 
Lord  be  angry,  and  I  will  speak  yet  but  this  once, 
— peradventure  ten  shall  be  found  there.     And  he 
said,  I  will  not  destroy  it  for  ten's  sake."     1  find 
several  others  performing  the  ofiice  of  mediator 
and  intercessor  in  common  with  Jesus,  as  I  no- 
ticed before  ;  and  indeed  this  seems  to  have  been 
an  ofl[ice  common  to  all  Prophets :  but  none  of 
them  is  supposed  to  have  been  clothed  with  God- 
head and  manhood  in  imion.    Jeremiah,  ch.  xxvii. 
ver.  18:    "But  if  they   be   Prophets,  and   if  the 
word  of  the  Lord   be   with    them,    let  them  now^ 
make  intercession  to  the  Lord   of  Hosts,"  «fec. 
Deuter.  ch.   v.   ver.  5  :     "I  (Moses)  stood    be- 
tween the  Lord  and  you  at  that  time,  to  show  you 
the  word  of  the  Lord."     I  regret  very  much  that 
a  sect  generally  so  enlightened,  should  on  the  one 
hand  have  supposed  the  divine  and  human  natures 
to  be  so  diametrically  opposed  to  each  other,  that 
it  is  morally  impossible  for  God  even  to  accept  in- 
tercession from  a  mere  human  being  in  behalf  of 
the  human  race,  and  on  the  other  hand  should  have 


/ 


/ 


J62 

advanced  that  the  Deity  joined  to  his  own  nature 
that  of  man,  and  was  made  flesh,  posscssmg  all 
the  members  and  exercising  all  the  functions  of 
man— propositions  which  are  morally  inconsistent 

with  each  other. 

To  avoid  the  supposed  dishonour  attached  to 
the  appointment  of  a  mediator  less  than  divine, 
the  Deity  is  declared  by  them  to  have  assumed  the 
human  shape,  and  to  have  subjected  himself  to 
the  feelings  and  inclinations  natural  to  the  human 
species ;  which  is  not  only  inconsistent  with  the 
immutable  nature  of  God,  but  highly  derogatory 
to  the  honour  and  glory  which  we  are  taught  to 

ascribe  to  him. 

Other  arguments  of  the  same  nature  are  fre- 
quently advanced,  but  they  are  all  together  much 
fewer  in  number,  and  far   less   convincing,  than 
those  which  are  commonly  brought  forward   by 
Hindoos  to  support  their  Polytheism.  Since,  then, 
in  evincing  the  truth  and  excellence  of  the   Pre- 
cepts of  Jesus,  there  is  no  need  of  the  aid  of  meta- 
physical arguments,  and  since  as  a  last  resource 
they  do  not  depend  for  their  support  on  the  ground 
of  mystery,  the  Compiler  has  in  the  discharge  of 
his  duty  towards  his  countrymen,  properly  intro- 
duced them  as  a  Guide  to  Peace  and  Happiness. 


# 


2(ir; 


I 


> 


APPENDIX. 


No.  1. 

O71  the  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  con- 
tained in  the  Netc, 

It  cannot  have  escaped  the  notice  of  attentive  readers  of 
the  Scriptures,  that  the  bare  quotations  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament from  the  Old,  when  unaccompanied  with  their 
respective  contexts,  are  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  Those 
who  are  not  well  versed  in  the  sacred  writings,  finding  in 
those  references  such  phrases  as  apparently  corroborate 
their  already  acquired  opinions,  not  only  lay  stress  upon 
them,  in  support  of  the  sentiments  generally  adopted,  but 
even  lead  others  very  often,  though  unintentionally,  into 
great  errors. 

Thus  Matthew  ii.  15  :  "  Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my 
Son."  The  Evangelist  refers  to  chapter  xi.  verse  1.  of 
Hosea  ;  which,  though  really  applied  to  Israel,  represented 
there  as  the  Son  of  God,  is  used  by  the  apostle  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Saviour,  in  consideration  of  a  near  resem- 
blance between  their  circumstances  in  this  instance : 
both  Israel  and  Jesus  were  carried  into  Egypt,  and  recalled 
from  thence,  and  both  were  denominated  in  the  Scriptures 
the  "  Son  of  God."  The  passage  of  Hosea  thus  runs, 
from  chapter  xi.  vers.  1st  to  ths  3d  :  "  When  Israel  was  u 
child,  then  I  loved  him,  and  called  my  Son  out  of  Egypt. 
\s  thoy  called  them,  so  they  went  from  them:  they  sacri- 


;, 


iG4 

liced  uuio  Baalim,  and  burnt  faiceuse  lo  graven  images. 
I  taught  Ephraim  also  to  go,  taking  them  by  their  arms ; 
but  they  knew  not  that  I  healed  them."  In  which  Israel, 
who  is  represented  as  a  child  of  God,  is  declared^  to  have 
sacrificed  to  Baalim,  and  to  have  burnt  incense  to  graven 
images— circumstances  which  cannot  justly  be  ascribed  to 

the  Saviour. 

With  a  view,  therefore,  to  remove  the  possibility  of  such 
errors,  and  to  convince  niy  readers  that  all  the  references 
in  the  New  Testament,  with  their  contexts,  manifest  the 
unity  of  God,  and  natural  inferiority  of  the  Messiah  to  the 
Father  of  the  universe,  I  have  endeavoured  to  arrange 
them  methodically,  beginning  with  such  quotations  as  were 
made  by  Jesus  himself,  agreeably  to  the  proposal  of  the 
Reverend  Editor. 

(Quotations  hy  Jesus  himself,  exactly  agreeing  with  the 

Htbrtw. 

JMattheii',  iv.  4,  "  Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone, 
but  by  every  word  that  proceedeih  out  of  the  mouth  of 
God:"  the  same  in  Luke  iv.  4,  compared  with  Deut.  viii. 
3,  "And  he  humbled  thee,  and  suflered  thee  to  hunger, 
and  fed  thee  with  manna,  which  thou  knewest  not,  neither 
did  thy  fathers  know;  that  he  might  make  thee  know, 
that  man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but  by  every  word 
that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  doth  man 

live.', 

Matthew  iv.  7,  "  Thou  shalt  not  tempt  the  Lord  thy 
God"— compared  with  Deut,  vi.  16,  17,  "Ye  shall  not 
tempt  the  Lord  your  God,  as  ye  tempted  him  in  Massah. 
Ye  shall  diligently  keep  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
your  God,  and  his  testimonies,  and  his  statutes,  which  he 
hath  commanded  thee." 


^ 


fe 


^'i 


^65 


Matthew  ix.  13,  "  But  go  ye  and  learn  what  that  meaii- 
cth,  I  will  have  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice" — compared  with 
Hosea  vi.  5,  6,  **  Therefore  have  I  hewed  them  by  the 
prophets;  I  have  slain  them  by  the  words  of  my  mouth; 
and  thy  judgments  are  as  the  light  that  goeth  forth.  For 
J  desired  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice  ;  and  the  knowledge  of 
God  more  than  burnt  ofl*erings." 

Matthew  xix.  19,  xxii.  39,  "Honour  thy  father  and 
thy  mother  :  and.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thy- 
self"— compared  with  Exodus  xx.  12,  "Honour  thy  father 
and  mother,  that  thy  days  may  be  long  upon  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee" — and  Leviticus  xix.  18, 
"  Thou  shalt  not  avenge  nor  bear  any  grudge  against  the 
children  of  thy  people  ;  but  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour 
as  thyself:  1  am  the  Lord.*' 

Matthew  xxi.  42,  "The  stone  which  the  builders  re- 
jected, the  same  is  become  the  head  of  the  corner:  this 
is  the  Lord^s  doing,  and  it  is  marvellous  in  our  eyes  ;" 
the  same  in  Mark  xii.  10,  Luke  xx.  17,  compared  with 
Psalm  cxviii.  22,  23,  "  I  (says  David)  will  praise  thee ; 
for  thou  hast  heard  me,  and  art  become  my  salvation. 
The  stone  which  the  b  dlders  refused  is  become  the  head- 
intone  of  the  corner.  This  is  the  Lord's  doing ;  it  is  mar- 
vellous in  our  eyes."  To  decide  whether  this  passage  is 
principally  applied  to  David,  and  in  the  way  of  accommo- 
dation to  Jesus,  or  originally  to  Jesus  himself,  is  entirely 
left  to  the  discretion  of  my  readers  ;  but  it  is  evident,  in 
either  case,  that  it  is  God  that  has  raised  the  stone  so  re- 
jected. 

Matthew  xxii.  44,  "  The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Sit 
thou  on  my  right  hand,  till  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  foot- 
stool :"  the  same  in  Mark  xii.  36,  Luke  xx.  42,  compared 
with  Psalm  ex.  1,  2,  "The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Sit 


87 


4 


260 

thou  at  my  right  hand,  until  1  make  thine  enemies  thy  foot- 
sLol  The  Lord  shall  sen  I  the  rod  of  thy  strength  out  of 
Zion  :  rule  thou  in  the  mi.Ut  of  thine  enemies."  Th.s  pas- 
sage is  simply  applied  to  the  Messiah,  manifestmg  that  the 
victory  gained  by  him  over  his  enemies  was  entirely  own>g 
to  the  influence  of  God. 

John  X.   35,   "  Ye    are    gods"-compared  w.lh   PsaFm 
iTT^ii    16   7"  God  staudeth  in  the  congregation  of  the 
mSV;'  he  J"dS«..  among  the  gods.     1  have  said   Ye  are 
^ds,  a;d  all  of^ou  are   children  of  the  Most  H.gh  :  but 
ye  shall  die  like  men.  and  fall  like  one  of  the  prmces 
wherein  Jesus  shows  from  this  quotation,  that  the  term  God 
is  figuratively  applicable  in  the  Scriptures  to  creatures  of  a 
superior  nature. 

OuotaUons  made  by  Jcsvs  him.df,  nearly  agreeing  with  the 

Hebrew  > 

Matthew  iv.  10,  "  Thou  shah  worship  the  Lord  thy  God, 
and  him  only  thou  shalt  serve"-compared  with  Deutyu 
13,  "Thou  shah  fear  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  serve  hini, 
and  Shalt  swear  by  his  name." 

Matthew  xiii.  14,  "  By  hearing  ye  shall  hear,  and  shal 
not  understand;  and   seeing  ye  shall   see,  and  shall   not 
perceive"-compared  with  Isaiah  vi.  9,   and  >ts  context, 
"  1  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  saying,  Whom  shall  I  send, 
and  who  will  go  for  us  .?     Then  said  I,  (Isaiah  )  Here  am 
I   send  me.     And  he  said,  Go  and  tell  this  people.  Hear  ye 
indeed,  but  understand  not ;  and  see  ye  indeed,  but  per- 
ceive not."     This  censure  has  original  reference  to  the  con- 
duct  of  the  people  to  whom  Isaiah  was  sent,  but  it  is  appli- 
ed  by  Jesus  in  an  accommodated  sense  to  that  ol  the  Jews 
of  his  time. 


/ 


'f'\ 


I 


2G7 

Matthew  xix.  5,  ''  For  this  cause  shall  a  man  leave 
father  and  mother,  and  shall  cleave  to  his  wife  :  and  they 
twain  shall  be  one  flesh'' — contpared  with  Genesis  ii.  23. 
'*  And  Adam  said,  This  is  now  bone  of  my  bone,  and  flesh 
of  my  flesh:  she  shall  be  called  \%(.inan;  because  she  was 
taken  out  of  man.  Therefore  shall  a  man  leave  his  father 
and  his  mother,  and  shall  cleave  uiiio  his  wife ;  and  they 
shall  be  one  flesh." 

Matthew  xix.  18,  19,  "  Thou  shalt  do  no  murder,  Thou 
shah  not  commit  adulterv,  Thou  shalt  not  steal,  i  hou 
shalt  not  bear  false  witness,  Honour  thy  father  and  thy 
mother  :  and,  Tliou  shalt  lo\e  thy  iieiJLi.bour  as  tin  self" — 
compared  viith  E.i.odus  xx.  12  16.  H  u.  ih;,  faiher 
and  thy  mother,  that  thy  da\s  may  be  long  in  »  land 
which  the  Lord  thy  Goil  givetfi  thee  Thou  shalt  not 
kill.  Thou  slialt  not  commit  a«{uhery.  Thou  shalt  not 
steal.  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against  thy 
neighbour." 

Matthew  xxii.  32,  *'  I  am  the  God  of  Ahraharr.,  and  the 
God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacoii" — ci>mpared  with 
Exodus  lii.  6,  "Moreover  he  said,  Iain  Use  G.  d  <»f  thy 
father,  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Is.r.ic,  and  t.he  God 
of  Jacob.  And  AJoses  hid  his  face  ;  for  he  was  afraid  to 
look  upon  God." 

Matthew  wVi.  31 J  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  tli\  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  with  ail  ihy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  Uiind  :" 
the  same  in  Mark  xVi.  30,  Luke  x.  27,  coujpared  with 
Deut.  vi.  5,  •*  And  thou  shall  love  the  Lord  thy  God  uith 
all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  ali  thy 
might." 

Matthew  xxvi.  31,  "Then  saith  Jesus  unro  them,  All 
ye  shall  be  oflVnded  because  ot  me  this  njglii  :  for  it  is 
written,  1  will  smite  the  Shepherd,  and  the  gheep   of  the 


/I 


'■■  I'l 


f 


I 


i 


*^ll^: 


■54' 

A 


> 


2G8 


flock  shall  be  scattered  abroad" — compared  with  ZechariaU 
xiii.  7,  "Awake,  O  sword,  against  my  Shepherd,  and 
against  the  man  that  is  my  fellow,*  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts:  smite  the  Shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall  be  scat- 
tered; and  I  will  turn  mine  hand  upon  the  little  ones." 

Verse  7  either  was  originally  applied  to  Agrippa, 
nonjx  the  last  king  of  the  Jews,  whose  subjects  were 
scattered  after  he  had  been  smitten  with  the  sword,  and 
in  an  accommodated  sense  is  applied  by  Jesus  to  himself, 
whose  disciples  were  in  like  manner  dispersed,  while  he 
was  sufl'ering  afflictions  from  his  enemies — or  is  directly 
applicable  to  Jesus;  but  in  both  cases  his  total  subordina- 
tion and  submission  to  the  Father  of  the  universe  is  too 
obvious  to  be  disputed. 

John  vi.  45,  "  It  is  written  in  the  Prophets,  And  they 
shall  be  all  taught  of  God.  Every  man,  therefore,  that 
hath  heard  and  hath  learned  of  the  Father,  cometh  unto 
me" — compared  with  IsaiahYw.  13,  "And  all  thy  children 
ishall  be  taught  of  the  Lord  ;  and  great  shall  be  the  peace 
of  thy  children.'' 

John  xiii.  18,  "I  speak  not  of  you  all ;  I  know  whom  1 
Jiave  chosen  :  but  that  the  Scripture  may  be  fulfilled.  He 
that  eateth  bread  with  me  hath  lifted  up  his  heels  against 
me" — compared  with  Psalm  xli.  9,  "  Mine  own  familiar 
friend,  in  whom  I  trusted,  which  did  eat  of  my  bread,  hath 
lifted  up  his  heel  against  me,"  is  immediately  applicable 
to  David  and  his  friend  Ahiihophel,  who  betrayed  him  ; 
and  secondarily,  to  Jesus,  and  Judas,  his  traitorou;* 
apostle, 

*The  word  ry^i^  found  in  the  original  Hebrew  scripture,  signi- 
4es  one  that  hves  near  another  *,  therefore  the  word  "  fellow"  in  the 
English  translation  is  not  altogether  correct,  as  justly  observed  by 
i^ifchbishop  Newcome. 


> 


269 

John  XV.  25,  "  But  this  cometh  to  pass,  that  the  word 
might  be  fulfilled  that  is  written  in  their  law.  They  hated 
me  without  a  cause"— compared  with  Psalm  cix.  2,  3, 
"They  have  spoken  against  me  with  a  lying  tongue. 
They  compassed  me  about  also  with  words  of  hatred  ; 
and  fought  against  me  without  a  cause."  Verse  3d  was 
originally  applied  to  David  and  his  enemies,  and  in  an 
accommodated  sense  to  Jesus  and  the  Jews  of  his  day. 

(Quotation  made  by  Jesus  himself,  agreeing  with  the 
Hebrew  in  sense,  but  not  in  words, 

Matthew  xxi.  16,  "  Out  of  the  mouth  of  babes  and 
sucklings  thou  hast  perfected  praise" — compared  with  Ps, 
viii.  2,  and  its  preceding  verse,  "  Out  of  the  mouth  of 
babes  and  sucklings  thou  hast  ordained  strength,  because 
of  thine  enemies  ;  that  thou  mightest  still  the  enemy  and 
the  avenger." 

(Quotation  taken  from  combined  Passages  of  Scripture. 

Matthew  xxi.  13,  "And  said  unto  them.  It  is  written, 
My  house  shall  be  called  the  house  of  prayer  :  but  you 
have  made  it  a  den  of  thieves"— compared  with  Isaiah 
Ivi.  17,  "For  mine  house  shall  be  called  the  house  of 
prayer  for  all  people.^'  Ch.  vii.  11,  "  Is  this  house  which 
is  called  by  my  name  become  a  den  of  robbers  in  your 
eyes'"* 


?" 


(Quotation  differing  from  the  Ilebrczv,  but  agreeing  with 

the  Septuagint, 

Matthew  XV.  7—9,    "  Ye  hypocrites,  well   did  Esaias 
prophesy  of  you,  saying,  This  people  draweth  nigh  unto 


# 


\\ 


\\  i 


'it 


270 

,ne  with  their  mouth,  and  honoureth  me  with  their  lips ; 
but  their  heart  is  far  from  me.  But  in  vain  they  do  wor- 
ship me,  teaching  for  doctrines  the  con,mand««.nts  ol 
J„.._comp.red  with  hawk  .vxix.  13,  wh.ch  m  the  Sep- 
tuaRint  corresponds  exactly  with  the  Gospel,  but  which 
in  verse  9,  differs  from  the  original  Hebrew,  thus  trans- 
lated in  the  common  version:  "  And  their  fear  towards  me 
is  taught  by  the  precepts  of  men." 

Quotation,  in  v^hieh  there  is  reason  to  '^^P''^''"'^^:^' 
^Readin,  in  H.bre.,  or  tkat  tke  Jpostles  ««''-;'-''' 
^ords  in  a  sense  different  from  that  expressed  .«  on, 

•r 

hexicons, 

Matihe.  xi.   10,  "This  is  he   of  whom  it   is  ^^.iuen 
Behold,  I  send  my  messenger  before  '%  >-;/^^;  ^ 
prepare   thy   way  before  t/,ee"-.o,„pared  w'ti>^/«'-A 
LI  "  Behold  1,W«  send   •">  ■"'•-"^'"•.;"       ^^ 
prepare  the  way  before  ,ne."      Matthew  xxv.  3  ,      I  «  U 
S  the  Shepherd,  and  the  sheep   of  the   flock   shall  be 
Tattered    abroad"-compared    with    Z>char,ah     vn.    8, 
Tstue  the  Shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall  ^e  so--c^ 
TuTce  iv    8,  "Thou   shalt  mrshtp  the  Lord  thy  Ood, 

„tt.  on.     .h.U  .1.0,,  -.■■-7-;^  td  ^^ 
vi.  13,  "Thou  shah  fear  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  serxc 

him." 

quotations  slightly  vnryi^,?  from  the  Septuagint. 

T   1.   •,„   18   19    "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  mc, 
beca:  :  :    a'h  a;.oinli  m^to  preach   the  .ospe,  to  t  e 
^oor      he  I'^-th  sent  me  to   heal   the  broken-hear^d.  to 
'each  d  IWerance  to  the  captives,  and  reco.er^ng  of  «g 
Ite  blind :  to  .et  at  liberty  them  that  are  bru.sed  ;  to 


» 


mmm 


271 

preach  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord"— compared  with 
Isaiah  Ixi.  1,  2,  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me; 
because  the  Lord  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings 
unto  the  meek  :  he  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken- 
hearted, to  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the  open^ 
ing  of  the  prison  to  them  that  are  bound  ;  to  proclaim  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord." 

Now  I  beg  the  attention  of  my  readers  to  these  quota- 
tions ascribed  to  Jesus  himself,  and  to  appeal  to  them,  whe- 
ther he  assumed  in  any  of  these  references  the  character 
of  the  Deity,  or  even  equality  with  him.  I  am  certain 
that  they  will  find  nothing  of  the  kind  :  Jesus  declared 
himself  in  these  instances  entirely  subordinate  to  the  Al- 
mighty God,  and  subject  to  his  authority,  and  frequently 
compared  himself  to  David  or  some  of  the  other  Prophets. 


f 


/ 


f\l 


m 


No.  11. 

On  the  lieffcrenccs  made  to  the  Old  Testament 
in  Support  of  the  Dni>i  of  Jesus. 

Trinitarian    Divines   q.iote  John  i.    14,    "  And   the 
Word    was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  ainonn  us,  (and  «e  be- 
held    his  Riory,   the  ^tory  as  of  the  only    bepotten  of  the 
Father  )  full  of  grace  and  truth,"  as  a  reference  to  Isaiali, 
ix  6    "  For  unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is  given, 
and  'the  government   shall  be  upon  his  shoulder  ;  and  his 
mme  shall  be  called  Wonderful,   Counsellor,  The  mighty 
God    The  everlasting    Father,  The  Prince  ol  Peace,"— 
though  the  evangelist  John  made  no  allusion   to  this  pas- 
sage of  baiah  in  the  verse  in  question.     The  passage   ol 
Isaiah  thus  referred  to  was  applied  to  HezeUah,   the  son 
of  Ahai,   figuratively  designated  as  the  son  ol   the  virgin, 
the  daughter  of  Zion.  to  wit,  Jerusalem,   foretold   by  the 
Prophet  as  the  deliverer  of  the  city  from  the  hands  of  its 
enemies,   though   its  utter  destruction  was  then  threatened 
by  the  kings  of  Syria  and  Israel.     The  words  "a  virgm,^^ 
according  to  the  English  translation,  are   "  the  virgin, 
both  in  the  original  Hebrew  and  in  the  Greek  ol  the  Gospel 
of  Mattheio,  as   well    as  in  the    Septuagint.     But   unless 
\hai  was  aware  of  the  allusion  of  the  Prophet,  the  use  ol 
the  definite  article  in   this  passage  must  be   quite  inexpli- 
cable •  and  no  one  will  contend  for  a  moment,  that  it  wa* 
-iven  to  that  wicked  king  to  understand  that  the  mother 
of  Christ  was  the  virgin  alluded  to  ;  what  then  could  Aim/, 
have  comprehended  by  the  expression  "  the  v.rgm  ^"  On 


1 


I        ~ 


\ 


^ 
I 


273 

referring   io  2' Kings,  xix.21,we  find  the  same  Prophet 
make  use  of  the  very   expression,  where   he  informs  the 
king,  llezekiah,  of  the  denunciation  of  God  against  Senna- 
cherib, the  blasphemous  king  of  Assyria,  who  was  at  that 
time    besieging  Jerusalem.     "  This  is  the   word  that   the 
Lord  hath  spoken  concerning  him  ;  The  virgin,  the  daugh- 
ter of  Zion,  hath    despised    thee,   and    laughed   thee    to 
scorn."— It   is    impossible  to  conceive  that    these   words, 
expressly  spoken  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  bear  any  allusion 
to  the   virgin,    the  mother   of  Christ ;  and    it    illustrates 
clearly    the  otherwise   obscure   expression  of  the   Prophet 
addressed   to   Ahaz,    when    he  foretold  to  him    the   happy 
reign  of  his  successor  Hezekiah.     In  Isaiah,  x.  32,  "  He 
(the    king    of  Assyria)    shall   shake   his  hand    against  the 
mount   of  the  daughter    of  Zi(m,   ihe  hill   of  Jerusalem  " 
The  epithet  "  The   daughter  of  Zion,"   which  in  the  last 
passage  was  used  as  synonymous  with  «  the  virgin,''  here 
signifies  Jerusalem  itself,  in  which  sense  it  was  commonly 
used    in  the    figurative  language  of  the  Prophet,    and  na 
doubt  well  understood  by  Ahaz  :  for  we  find  the  same  words 
in  many  other  passages  used  to  signify  either  a  city  or  the 
people  of  a  city.     Isaiah,  xxii.  12  :  "  And  he  said.  Thou 
Shalt  no  more   rejoice,  O  thou  oppressed  virgin,  daugh- 
ter of  Zion."     Ch.    xlvii.   1  :  *^  Come   down,    and    sit  in 
the   dust,    O   virgin    daughter     of    Babyl«n."~Jcrem»V/A 
xiv.  17  :  "Therefore  thou  shah  sa>  this  ivord  unto  them  : 
Let   mine  eyes  run  down  with  tears  n.ghi  and  da>,  and  let 
them  not  cease  ;  for  the   virgin  daughter  of  my  people  is 
broken  with  a  great  breach."     Ch.  xviii.  13  :  "  Therefore 
thus  sailh  the  Lord  ;  Ask  ye  now  among  the  heathen,  who 
hath  heard  such   things  ;  the  virgin  of  Israel  hath  done  a 
very  horrible  thing."     Ch.  xxxi.  4  :  "  Again  I  ..ill  build 
thee,  and  thou    shalt  be   built,  O  virgin  of  Israel ;  thou 

33 


r.i 


..  \ 


27^ 

Shalt  again  be  adorned  with  thy  tabrets,  and  shalt  go  forth 
in  the  dances  of  them  that  make  merry."  Ver.  13  :  "  Then 
shall  the  virgin  rejoice  in  the  dance."  &c.  Ver.  21  :  "  Set 
thee  up  waymarks,  make  thee  high  heaps  :  set  thine  heart 
toward  the  highway,  even  the  way  which  thou  wentest  : 
turn  again,  O  virgla  of  Israel,  turn  again  to  these  thy 
cities."  Lam.  I  15  :  "  The  Lord  hath  trodden  the  virgin, 
the  daughter  of  Judah,  as  in  a  wine  press."  Ch.  ii.  13  : 
"  What  thing  shall  1  take  to  witness  for  thee  ?  what  thing 
shall  I  liken  to  ti.ec,  O  daughter  of  Jerusalem  ?  what  thing 
shall  I  liken  to  thee,  O  virgin  daughter  of  Zion  f  for  thy 
breach  is  great  like  the  sea  ;  who  can  heal  thee  .?"  ^mos, 
V.  2 :  "  The  virgin  of  Israel  is  fallen,  she  shall  no  more 
rise  :  she  is  forsaken  upon  her  land  ;  there  is  none  to  raise 

her  up." 

To  show  that  the  passages  in  question,  as  well  as  all 

that  is  foretold  in  this  and  the  succeeding  chapters,  refer  to 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  nothing  more  than  a  comparison 
of  them  with  the  records  of  that  reign  is  requisite.  1  shall 
therefore  lay  before  my  readers  all  those  verses  in  these 
chapters  that  are  commonly  referred  to  by  Trinitarians  as 
alluding  to  the  coming  of  Christ,  with  their  contexts,  to- 
gether with  such  parts  of  the  history  of  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  as  appear  to  me  to  be  clearly  indicated  by  those 

passages. 

Isaiah,  vii.  1  :  "  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Ahaz, 
the  son  of  Jotham,  the  son  of  Uzziah,  king  of  Judah,  that 
Rezinthe  king  of  S^ria,  and  Pekah  the  son  of  Remaliah, 
king  of  Israel,  went  up  toward  Jerusalem  to  war  against 
it,  but  could  not  prevail  against  it.  2,  And  it  was  told 
the  house  of  David,  saying,  Syria  is  confederate  with 
Ephraim.  And  his  heart  was  moved,  and  the  heart  of  his 
people,  as  the  trees  of  the  wood  are  moved  with  the  wind. 


^ 


r 

I 


i? 


W  .'r, 


■I 

4i 


S,  Then  said  the  Lord  unto  Isaialj,  Go  forth  now  to  meet 
Ahaz,   thou,  and  Sheaijashub  thy  son,   at  the   end  of  the 
conduit   of  the  upper  pool   in  the  highway  of  the  fuller's 
field;  4,   And   say  unto   him,  Take  heed    and   be    quiet ^ 
fear  not,  neither  be  faint-liearted,  for    the  two  tails  of  these 
smoking    firebrands,   for  the    fierce  anger   of  Rezin   with 
Syria,  and  of  the  son  of  Remaliah.     5,  Because  Syria, 
Ephraim,  and  the  son  of  Remaliah,  have  taken  evil  counsel 
against  thee,   saying,  6,  Let  us  go  up  against  Judah,  and 
vex  it,    and  let  us  make  a  breach  therein  for  us,  and  set  a 
king  in  the  midst  of  it,  even  the  son  of  Tabeal  :  7,  Thus 
saith  the  Lord    God,   it  shall  not  stand,   neither    shall    it 
come  to  pass.     8,  For  the  head  of  Syria  is  Damascus,  and 
the  head  of  Damascus    is  Rezin  ;  antl  within   threescore 
and  five  years  shall    Ephraim  be   broken,  that  it  be  not  a 
people.     9,  And  the  head  of  Ephraim  is  Samaria,  and  the 
head  of  Samaria  is  Remaliah's  son.     If  ye  will  not  believe, 
surely   ye    shall   not   be   established.      10,  Moreover,  the' 
Lord  spake  again  unto  Ahaz,  saying,    n,  Ask  thee  a  sign 
of  the  Lord  thy  Go^i  ;  ask  it  either  in  the  depth,  or  in  the 
height  above.      12,  But  Ahaz  said,  [  will  not  ask,   neither 
wdl  I  tempt  the  Lord.      13,  And  he  said,  Hear  ye  now,  O 
house  of  Davi,,,  Is  it  a  sn.all  ihino  for  you  to  weary  men, 
but  will    ye    w(ary     ,ny   God    also  ?   14,    Therefore    the 
Lord    himself  shall   givt  you  a  si^n  ,  B«»;old,    fh.  vi.^ri„ 
shall    ccuiceive,    and  bear  a  son,  and   shall  call    his    name 
Immaniiel.      15,   B.       r   and   honey    shall  he  eat,  t;  ai  he 
may  know  to  refuse   the  evil,   and  choose  the  good.     16 
For   before  the  child  shall  know  to  refuse   the   evil,   and 
choose  the  good,  the  land  that  thou  abhorrest  shall  be  for- 
saken of  both  her  kings.      17,  The  Lord  shall  bring  upon 
thee,    and  upon  thy  people,  and  upon   thy  father's  house, 


^ 


H 


! 


:j:g 

days  that  have  not  come,  from  the  day  that  Ephraim  ile- 
parted  from  Judah  ;  even  the  king  of  Assyria." 

Chap.  viii.  5  :  "  Tlie  Lord  spake  also  unto  me  again, 
sayinjr,  6,  Forasmuch  as  lliis  people  refuseth  the  waters  of 
Shiloah  that  go  softly,  and  rejoice  in  Rezin  and  Remaliah's 
son  ;  7,  Now  therefore,  behoM,  the  Lord  bringeth  up 
upon  them  the  waters  of  the  river,  strong  and  many, 
4>ven  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  all  his  glory  ;  and  he  shall 
come  up  over  all  the  channels,  and  go  over  all  his  banks  ; 
8,  And  he  shall  pass  through  Judah  ;  he  shall  overflow 
and  go  over,— lie  shall  reach  even  to  the  neck;  and 
the  stretching  out  of  his  wings  shall  fdl  the  breadth  of  thy 
land,  O  Immanuel." 

Chap.  ix.  1  :  "  Nevertheless,   the   dimness   shall  not  be 
such   as  N* as  in  her  vexation,   when   at  the  first  he   lightly 
afflicted  the  laud  of  Ze bulon,  and  the  land  of  Naphtali, 
and  afterwards  did   more  grievously  afflict  her  by  the  way 
of  the  sea,  beyond  .lordan  in  Galilee  of  the   nations.     2, 
The  people   that   walked  in   darkness   have   seen  a   great 
lic;hl  :  they  that  dwell  in  the  land  of  the  shadow  of  death, 
upon  them  hath  the  light  shined.     3,  Thou  hast  multiplied 
the  nation,    and   not  incr.astd    the  joy  :  thty  joy   before 
thee   according  to  the  joy  in  harvest,  ^nd    as  ujen  rejoice 
when  they  divide  the  spoil.     4,  For  thou  hast  broken  the 
yoke  of  his    urdeu,  and  the  staff  of  his    shoulder,  the  rod 
of  hi    oppressor,  as  in  the  day  of  Midiau.     5,  For  every 
battle  of  the  warrior  is  v\ith  coufiistd  noise,   and  garments 
rolled  in  blood  ;  but  this  shall  be  with  burning  and  fuel  of 
fire.     For  unt*»  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is  given  : 
and   the  goveruiuenl  shall   be   upon  his   shoulder:  and  his 
name  shall  be  callto  W.Muierful,  Coiin^elh»r,  The  mighty 
God,  The  everlasting  Father,  The  Prince  of  Peace.     7, 


i 


2 


I  4 


Of  tlie  increase  of  bis  government  and   peace   tliere  shall 
be  no  end,»  upon  the  throne  of  David,  and  upon  liis  king- 
dom,  to  order  it,  and  to  establish  it  with  judgment   and 
with  justice  from  henceforth  even  for  ever.     The  zeal   of 
the  Lord  of  hosts  will  perform  this." 

Chap.  X.  5  :  "  O  Assyrian,   the  rod  of  mine  anger,  and 
the  staff  in  tlHjir  hand  is  mine  indignation.     G,  I  will  send 
him  against  an  hypocritical  nation,  and  against  the  people 
of  my  wrath  will  I  give  him  a  charge,   to  take  the  spoil, 
and  to  take  the  prey,  and  to  tread  them  down  like  the  mire 
of  the  streets.     7.   Howb.it   he   meanetb  not  so,  neither 
doth  his  heart  think  so,  but  it  Is  in   his  heart  to  destroy 
and  cut  off  nations  not  a  (cvy.     8,  For  he  saith.   Are  not 
my  pr.nces  altogether  kin„^s  ?    9,  U  not  Calno  as  Carche- 
mish  ?  ,s  not  Hamath  as  Arpad  >  is  not  Samaria  as  Da- 
tnascus  ?j    10,   As  my  hand  hath  found  the  kingdoms  of 
the  idols,    and   whose  graven   images  did  excel  them  of 
Jerusalem  and  of  Samaria  ;  11,  Shall  1  not,  as  I  have  done 
unto   Samaria  and  her  idols,  so  do  to  Jerusalem  and   her 
'Jols  .^    12,    Wherefore  it   shall  come  to   pass,  that,  when 
the  Lord   hath  performed   his  whole   work   upon   mount 
/iion  and  on  Jerusalem,    I  will  pm.isi,  the  fruit  of  the  stout 

JT"!?'  y  '""  "'""  ""■'"'  "'  ""'P'""'  '^'"?"'»ge  «i"  '"acl.  no 
weight  to  the  terms  "  no  end"  and  "  for  ever,"  fo,.n,l  ^.  oh.  v.  7  :  for 

the  former  often  signilies  plenteousness,  and  the  -ntler  long,  but  not 
eternal  duration.  Vide  Reel.  ,v  IG  :  '•  There  is  no  end  of  all  the 
people,  even  of  all  that  have  been  before  them."  lsa.ahii.7-  "Nei 
ther  «  „,e,e  any  end  of  their  treasure,  neither  is  there  any  end 
of  thetr  chanots."  Nahun.  ii.  9 :  "  There  is  none  end  of  their  store." 
Cft.  n.  S :  "  And  there  is  none  end  of  their  corpses."  Psalm  cxiv.  2,  9  : 
1  will  pra.se  thy  name  for  ever  and  ever."  Deut.  xv.  1 7  :  "  And  he 
shall  be  thy  servant/or  ever." 

t  Compare  vers.  9-11.  with  ,he   historical  relation  of  the  vain 
imast.ngs  of  the  Assyrian,  narrated  in  2  Kings  xviii.  .S.S-,'?.'-,. 


o 


^78 

Wt  or  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  the  glory  ofhls  lugl. 
bok  "--16,  "  Therefore  shall  the  Lord,  the  Lord  o  hosts, 
look*.       1",  le  .nness  •  and  under  his  glory  he 

send  among  his  fat  ones  leanness  ,  a  ,  7    And 

shall  kindle  a  burning  like  the  l.urn.ng  of  a  fie      H,  A  ^ 
the  li.'htof  Israel  shall  be  for  a  fire,  and  h.s  Holy  One  tor 
aflaL:  and  it  shall   burn  and  devour  his   tl-s  -d 
briers  in  one  day."-24,  "  ^'-e-ore  thus  sa.U.  the  Lord 
God  of  hosts,  O  .ny  people  that  dwelles    .n  Z.on,  be  not 
nfraid  of  the   Assyrian  :  he   shall  snnte  thee  wuh  a  rod, 
aid    hall  lift  up  hfs  staff  against  thee,  after  the  manner  of 
E.ypt.     25,  For  ye.  a  very  li.de  while,  and  the  .nd-gna- 
;;:„' 'shall  cease,  and  mine  anger,   in  ^- ^^"^l^ 
27  *  "  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  .n  that  day,  that  ms 
bu'rden  shall  be  taken  away  from  off  thy  shoulder,  and  Ins 
yoke  from  off  thy  neck,  and  the  yoke  shall  be  destroyed 
because  of  the  anointing."  . 

2  King,  xviii.  1 :  "  Now  it  came  to  pass,    m  the  th.rd 
year  of  Hoshea  son  of  Elah  king  of  Israel,  that  Hezek.ah 
the  son  of  Ahaz  king  of  Judah  began  to  re.gn.  2,  Iwenty 
and  five  years  old   was  he  when  h.  began  to  re.gn  ;  and 
he  reigned  twenty  and  nine   years  in  Jerusalem  :   h.s  mo- 
ther's  name  also  was  Abi,  the  daughter  of  Zachar.ah.     3, 
An.'  he  did  that  which  was  right  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord 
accordi.^  to  all  that  David  his  father  did.     4,  He  re.noved 
the  hish>ccs,  and  brake  the  images,  and  cut  down  the 
grove'    a' d  brake  in  pieces  the  brazen  serpent  that  Mose 
had  .nade :   for  unto  those  days  the  children  of  Israel  d.d 
burn  ince..se  to  it;  and   he  called  it  Nehushtan.     5,  He 
trusted  in  the  Lord  God  of  Israel ;  so  that  after  him  was 
none  like  him  among  all  the  kings  of  Judah,  nor  any  that 

*  Compare  with  2  Kings  xvi.  7.  "  So  Aha.  sen.  .nessengcrs  .0 
Tiglath-pileser  King  of  Assyria,  saying,  I  am  thy  -rvnnt  and  .!■> 
son,"  kc.  and  cli.  xviii,  7.  as  above. 


\ 


279 

were  before  him,     6,  For  he  clave  to  the  Lord,  and  de- 
parted not  from   following  hira,  but  kept  his  command- 
raents,  which  the  Lord  commanded  Moses.      7,  And  the 
Lord  was  with  him  :  and  he  prospered  whithersoever  he 
went  forth :  and   he  rebelled   against  the  king  of  Assyria 
and  served  him  not.     8,    He  smote  the   Philistines,  even 
unto  Gaza,  and  the  borders  thereof,  from  the  tower  of  the 
watchmen   to  the  fenced  city." — 17,   "And   the  king   of 
Assyria  sent  Tartan,  and  Rabsaris,  and  Rab-shakeh,  from 
Lachish  to  king  Hezekiah,  with  a  great  host  against  Jeru- 
salem.    And  they  went  up  and  came  to  Jerusalem.     And 
when  they  were  came  up,  they  came   and   stood  by    the 
conduit  of  the  upper  pool,  which  is  in  the  highway  of  the 
fuller's  field."--2S,  "Then  Rab-shakeh  stood,  and    cried 
with  a  loud  voice  in  the  Jews'  language,  and  spake,  saying, 
Hear  the  word  of  the  great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria  :  29^ 
Thus  saith  the  king,   Let  not  Hezekiah  deceive  you :  for 
he  shall  not  be  able  to  deliver  you  out  of  his  hand  :  30, 
Neither  let  Hezekiah  make  you   trust  in  the  Lord,  saying, 
The  Lord  will  surely  deliver  us,  and  this  city  shall  not  be 
delivered  into  the  hand  of  ihe  king  of  Assyria.  31,  Hearken 
not  unto  Hezekiah  :  for  thus  saith  the  king  of  Assyria, 
Make  an  agreement  with  me  by  a  present,  and  come  out 
to  me,   and  then  eat  ye  every  man  of  his  own  vine,   and 
every  one  of  his  fig-tree,  and  drink  ye  every  one  the  waters 
of  his  cistern :  32,  Until  I  come  and  take  you   away  to  a 
land  like  your  own  land ;  a  land  of  corn  and  wine,  a  land 
of  bread  and  vineyards,  a  land  of  oil-olive  and  of  honey, 
that  ye  may  live,  and  not  die:  and  hearken  not  unto  Heze- 
kiah,   when  he    persuadeth  you,  saying   The    Lord    will 
deliver  us.     33,  Hath  any  of  the  gods  of  the  nations  deli- 
vered  at  all  his  land  out  of  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Assyria  f 
34,  Where  are  the  gods  of  Hamath,  and  of  Arpad  ?  where 


)   V1 


1 

I 


\ ' 


11 


( 


1 


I 


280 

are  the  gods  of  Sepharvaim,  Hena,  and  Ivah  t  have  they 
delivered  Samaria  out  of  mine  hand  ?  35,  Who  are  they 
among  all  the  gods  of  the  countries  that  have  delivered 
their  country  out  of  mine  hand,  that  the  Lord  should  de- 
liver Jerusalem  out  of  mine  hand  ?" 

Chap.  xix.  15,  "  And  Hezekiah  prayed  beforethe  Lord, 
and  said,  O  Lord  God  of  Israel,    which  dwellest  between 
the  cherubims,  thou  art  the  God,  even  thou  alone,  of  all 
the   kingdoms  of  the  earth  ;  thou   hast  made  heaven  and 
earth.     16,  Lord,  bow  down  thine  ear,  and  hear:  open, 
Lord,  thine  eyes,  and  see:   and  hear  the  words  of  Senna- 
cherib, which  hath  sent  him  to  reproach  the  living  God." 
19  «  Now  therefore,  O  Lord  our  God,  1  beseech  thee  save 
thou  us  out  of  his  hand,  that  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth 
may  know  that  thou  art  the  Lord  God,  even  thou  only. 
20,  Then  Isaiah  the  son  of  Amoz  sent  to  H^ztkiuh,  saying, 
Thus  saiih  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  That  which  thou  hast 
prayed  to  me  against  Sennacherib  king  of  Assyria  1  have 
heard.     21,  This  is  the  word  that  the  Lord  hath  spoken 
concerning'him  ;   The   virgin,  the  daughter  of  Zion,  hath 
de?pised  thee,  and  laughed  tliee  to  scorn ;  the  daughter  of 
Jerusalem  hath  shaken  her  head  at  thee.     22,  Whom  hast 
thou  reproached  and  blasphemed  ?  and  aejainst  whom  hast 
thou  exalted  thy  voice,   and  lifted  up  thine  eyes  on  high  ? 
even  against  the  Hoiy  One  of  Israel.     23,  B>  the  messen- 
gers thou  hast  reproached  the  Lord,  and  hast  said,  With 
the  multitude  of  my  chariots  I  am  come  up  to  the  height 
of  the  mountains,  to   the  sides  of  Lebanon,  and  will  cut 
down  the  tall  cedar  trees  thereof,  and  the  choice  fir  trees 
thereof:  and  I  will  enter  into  the  l.)dgings  of  his  borders, 
and  into  the  forest  of  hisCarmel."-27,  "  But  1  know  thy 
abode,  and  thy  going  out,  and  thy  coming  in,  and  thy  rage 
against  me.     2S,  Because  thy  rage   against   me  and  thy 


2&\ 

tumult  is  come  up  into  mine  ears,  therefore  1  will  put  my 
hook  in  thy  nose,    and  my  bridle  in  thy  lips,  and  I  will 
turn  thee  back  by  the  way  by  which  thou  earnest"     32, 
"  Therefore   thus   saith  the  Lord   concerning  the  king  of 
Assyria,  He  shall    not  come   into  this   city,   nor  shoot  art 
arrow  there,    nor  come  before  it  with  a  shield,  nor  cast  a 
bank   against  it.     33,  By  the  way  that  he  came,  by  the 
same  shall  he  return,   and  shall  not   come  into  this   city, 
saith  the  Lord.     34,  For  I  will  defend  this  city,  to  save  it, 
lor  mine  own  sake,  and  for  my  servant  David's  sake.     35j 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  night,  that  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
went  out,  and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians  an  hun- 
dred fourscore  and  five  thousand  :  and  when   they  arose 
early  in  the  morning,  behold,  they   were  all  dead  corpses. 
36,  So    Sennacherib  king  of  Assyria  departed,  and  went 
and  returned,   and  dwelt  at  Nineveh.     37,  And  it  came  to 
pass,   as  he  was    worshipping    in  the  house    of  Nisroch 
his  god,  that  Adrammelech  and  Sharezcr  his  sons   smote 
him   with    the  sword  ;  and    they  escaped   into  the   laud 
of   Armenia  :  and   Esar-haddou   his  son  reigned  in    his 
stead." 

2  Chron,  xxx.  24  :  "  For  Hezekiah  king  of  Judah  did 
give  to  the  congregation  a  thousand  bullocks,  and  seven 
thousand  sheep  ;  and  the  princes  gave  to  the  congregation 
a  thousand  bullocks,  and  ten  thousand  sheep  :  and  a  great 
number  of  priests  sanctified  themselves.  5>5,  And  ail  the 
congregation  o{  Judah,  with  the  priests  and  the  Levites, 
and  all  the  congregation  that  came  out  of  Israel,  and  the 
strangers  that  came  out  of  the  land  of  Israel,  and  that 
dwelt  in  Judah,  rejoiced.  26,  So  there  was  great  joy  in 
Jerusalem  ;  for  since  the  time  of  Solomon,  the  son  of 
David  king  of  Israel,  there  was  not  the  like  in  Jerusalem. 
27,  Then  the  priests  ai;d  the  Levites  arose  and  blessed  the 


h 


\ 


281 

people  :  and    .heir    voice   was  heard,   and    their    prayer 
^a.ne  up  to  his  holy  dwelling-place,  even  unto  heavet. 

rhap'  xxxi.  20: ''And  thus  did  Hcxekialr  thro«,h«.t  all 
J„dah,'and  wrought  that  which  was  good  -  "S^'jJ 
truth  before  the  Lord  his  God.  21  And  - -ery  wo  k 
,„„.  .e  began  in  the  service  of  the  house  o  Go^,  an-l  n 
the  law,  and  in  the  commanr-ments,  to  seek  h.s  God,  he 
it  with  all  his  heart,  and  prospered." 

Chap,  xxxii  23  :  "  And  many  brought  g.fu  unto  the 
Lord  to  Jerusalem,  and  presents  to  Hezek.ah  kmg  ot 
iTdi.  so  that  he  >  as  magnified  in  the  sight  of  all  nations 
Judah.  sotiiai  ,,  ..^Hriekiah  slept  with  his  fa- 

from  thenceforth.'      oi,      Ann  rift  i  ,, 

thers   and  thev  buried  him  in  the  chiefest  of  the  s  p  dchre 
thers   ana  ^^^^  ^^^  inhabitants 

of  the  sons  ol   Uaviu  .  ami  <>■  ,      .      »     i  \i  ....wi^h 

of  Jerusalem  did  hi,«  honour  at  his  death.   And  Manas»eh 

his  son  reicrned  in  his  siead  .     j  • 

I  as  is  declared  by  Trin.tanans,  the  child  promised  .n 
ch  vii.  14,  be  the  same  that  is  alluded  to  m  ch  ix  b.and 
Ch  I  17,  t  is  quite  evident  from  the  context  that  he  was 
obete  deliverer  of  the  Je«s  frou.  the  hands  of  the  king 
of  Wia  and  was  to  be  distinguished  by  the  excellence 
ot  A«vria,   an  r^>;nect  in    which  he  was  to 

of  his  administration  and    the  respect  m   wi 

be  held  by  all  .he  nations.  Making  allowance  for  the  lo' 
p  rbolicaf  style  of  Eastern  nations,  nothing  ca"  more  aptly 
apply  as  prophecy  than  these  passages  do  to  the  reign  of 
Xt'kLi'as'des'cribedin  .he  above  "tracts  f...nitj».» 
»„d  Chronicles.  Bu.  «hat,  it  may  be  asked,  ^^^^l 
of  Christ  to  do  with  .he  destruciion  of  the  king  of  A>s>r.a. 
o^  Leonid  it  be  said  that   before  he  "  k.iew  to  reuse 

e  evil  and  choose   the  good,"  the  land  of  Syria  a^ 
Israel  should  be  deserted  of  their  respective  kings  Rexiu 
Id  pfkah,  who  were  gathered  to  their  fathers  many  year, 
before  his  birth  ': 


I 

% 
$ 


28.^ 


This  ilhistrions  son  of  Ahaz  was  not  the  only  king  among 
the  select  nation  of  God,  that  was  honoured  with  such 
names  as  Hezekiah  or  "  God  my  strength,"  and  '*  Em- 
manuel" or  "  God  with  us  ;"  and  also  with  such  epi- 
thets as  "  Wonderful,  Counsellor,  or  Mighty  God,  the 
Everlasting  Father,  and  the  Prince  of  Peace/'  We  find 
several  other  chiefs  of  that  tribe  that  used  to  walk  in  the 
way  of  God,  dignified  in  Scripture  with  epithets  of  a  si- 
milar import.  Genesis  xxxii.  28  :  "  And  he  said,  Thy 
name  shall  be  called  no  more  Jacob,  but  Israel,  (Prince  of 
God  :)  for  as  a  prince  hast  thou  power  with  God  and  with 
men,  and  hast  prevailed."  Fsalm\\\\\x.  18:  **  For  the 
Lord  is  our  defence  ;  and  THE  HOLY  ONE  of  Israel  is 
our  king.  19,  Then  thou  spakest  in  vision  to  thy  Holy 
One,  and  saidst,  I  have  laid  help  upon  one  that  is  mighty  : 
I  have  exalted  one  chosen  out  of  the  people.  20,  1  have 
found  David  my  servant  ;  with  my  holy  oil  have  I 
anointedhxm  :  27,  Also  I  will  make  him  MY  FIRST  BORN, 
higher  than  the  kings  of  the  earths 

As  to  the  word  "  a  virgin,"  found  in  the  English  trans- 
lation, I  request  my  readers  to  advert  to  the  original 
Hebrew  noS;*n  "  the  virgin,"  as  *vell  as  to  the  Greek  both 
of  the  Septuagint  and  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  ^^«^s  i,,; 
"the  virgin,"  leaving  it  to  them  to  judge,  whether  a  trans- 
lation which  so  entirely  perverts  the  meaning  preserved 
throughout,  by  men  whom  we  cannot  su>pert  of  ignorance 
of  the  original  language,  must  not  have  proceeded  from  a 
previous  determination  to  apply  the  term  *'  virgin,"  as 
found  in  the  Prophet,  to  the  mother  of  Christ,  in  order 
that  the  high  titles  applied  to  Hezekiah  might  in  the  most 
unqualified  manner  be  understood  of  Jesus. 

The  Evangelist  Matthew  referred  in  his  Gospel  to 
hoiah  vii.  14,  merely  for  the  purpose  of  accommodation  ;. 


1 


Ji\ 


\;1 


284 

the  Son  of  Ahaz  and  llie   Saviour  resembling  each  other, 
in  each  being  the  means,    at  ditrerent   periods,   though  in 
different  senses,  of  establishing  tlie  throne  of  the  house   of 
David.     In    the  same   manner  lie  referred   to  Hosca  xi.  1, 
in  ch.   ii.  15.  of  his  Gospel,  and  in  many  other  instances. 
How   inconsistent  is   it    that  a  sect,   which   maintains  die 
omniscience*  and   omnipotence    of  Jesus,   should  apply  to 
him  a  passage,  by  which  he  is  made  subicct  to  such  a  de- 
gree of  ignorance,  as  not  to  be  able  at  one  period  to  dis- 
tinguish   bctueen  good  and   evil.     {Isaiah   vii.  16:  *' For 
before  the  child   shall  know  to  refuse  the  evil,   and  choose 
the  good,*'  &c.)     Admitting  that  these  quotations  ii:  haiafi 
were  originally   applicable  to  Jesus,  they  cannot  assist  in 
proving  the  Deity  of  the   Messiah  ;  just  as  they  fall  short 
of  proving  the  divinity  of  Hezekiah  when  applied  to  him  : 
*-^for  we  find  in  the  sacred  ^^riiings  the  name  of  God,  and 
even   the   term    of  Jehovah,  the    peculiar   name    of  God, 
applied  as  an  appellation    to  others,   without  establishmg 
any  argument  for  asserting  the   Deity  of  those   to  whom 
such    names  are  given.     Jeremiah    xxxiii.  16  ;  ''  In   those 
days  shall  Judah    be  saved,     and  Jerusalem  shall    dwell 
safely  :  and  this  is  the  name  wherewith  she  shall  be  called, 
JEHOVAH   OUR  R1GHTE0U^NESS."     In  the  En- 
glish   version,    the  word  Jehovah    is  rendered  "  Lord,"  in 
this  and  in  other  passages.     Exodus  xvii.  15  :  "  And  Mo- 
ges  built  an  altar,  and  called  the  name  of  it  Jehovah-nissi, 
or  ♦  JEHOVAH   MY   BANNER.'  "     It  is  fortunate  that 
some  sect  has  not  hitherto  arisen,    maintaining  the  Deity  of 
Jerusalem,  or  of  the  altar  of  Moses,  from  the  authority  of 
the  passages  just  mentioned. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  ch.  i.  8,  9,  reference  is 
made  to  Paalm  xlv.  6,  7,  "  Thy  throne,  OGod,  is  forever 
and   ever,  he.      Thou  lovest    righteousness,   and   hatest 


28:i 


wickedness  :  therefore  God,  thy  God,  hath  anointed  thee," 
he.  I  have  frequently  noticed  that  the  term  '*  God  "  in 
an  inferior  sense  is  often  applied  in  the  Scriptures  to  the 
Messiah  and  other  distinguished  persons;  but  it  deserves 
particularly  to  be  noticed  in  this  instance,  that  the  Mes- 
siah, in  whatever  sense  he  is  declared  God,  is  in  the  very 
same  sense  described  in  ch.  v.  6,  ("  God  thy  God")  as 
having  a  God  superior  to  him,  and  by  whom  he  ims  ap- 
pointed to  the  office  of  Messiah. 

Supposed  application  of  the  term  "  Jehovah''   to  Jesus  in 
references  made  to  the  Old  Testament. 

Luke  i.  16,  18  :  "  And  many  of  the  children  of  Israel 
shall  he  (John  the  Baptist)  turn  to  the  Lord  their  God. 
And  he  shall  go  before  him  in  the  spirit  and  power  of 
Elias,  to  turn  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to  the  children,  and 
the  disobedient  to  the  wisdom  of  the  just;  to  make  ready 
a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord" — compared  with  Laiah 
xl.  3,  "  The  voice  of  him  that  crieth  in  the  wilderness. 
Prepare  ye  the  way  of  Jehovah,  make  straight  in  the  de- 
sert a  highway  for  our  God  :"  and  also  in  Malachi  iii.  1, 
"  Behold,  I  will  send  my  messenger,  and  he  shall  prepare 
the  way  before  me :  and  the  Lord  whom  ye  seek,  shall 
suddenly  come  to  his  temple,  even  the  messenger  of  the 
covenant,  whom  ye  delight  in  :  behold,  he  shall  come, 
saith  Jehovah  of  hosts."  From  this,  it  is  concluded  by 
Trinitarians,  that  because  the  Prophet  John  is  described 
as  the  forerunner  of  Jehovah,  and  in  the  evangelist  as  the 
forerunner  of  Jesus,  therefore  Jesus  must  be  Jehovah. 

In  reply  to  this,  it  may  be  simply  observed,  that  we  find 
in  the  Prophet  distinct  and  separate  mention  of  Jehovah 
and  of  the  Messiah   as  the  messenger  of  the   covenant; 


J 


W 


ir 


)  < 


'28G    ■ 

.T„,„  .Hererore  ought  to  be  '^-^^^:::::rZ^ 
.o.h.  in  the  sa.e  --"  ^  ;;— f.hTe.-y,   -v 

^e^s: i:;:x -" ; .. th^e ha... or ..... 

o^  of  the  general  whom  the  king  places  at  the  head  of  h.s 

"  They  also  refer  to  Isaiah  vi.  5,  "  For  mine  eyes  have 
n  1    kinc    the   Lord  of  hosts"-companng  .t  w.th 
seen   the    king,   me   i^  ■  ■  i-,:„i,    when  he  saw  his 

Tnhn  x\i   41,  "  These  things  said  l=,aiah,  wnen 
Irv    and    pake  of  him."     The  passage  in  the  evangelist 
glory,  anu  spa.  r^ferrinK  to  John  vin.  56, 

is  more  correctly  explained  by  r  ferr  ng 
»  Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  aay 
can  etder^ood  of  ocular   vision,   but  prophetic  an 

•  «liereas  the  fflory  seen  in  the  vision  ol   Isaiah 

r::::  oi  «:  hW„;e/in  tie  d^nvery  of  t..  commands 
,-         to  the  Pr.„d,et  <->---'-        .,„  ,,,,  J,,.,, 

Corinthians  i.  30.       U''i  "'  •'  ,.,„„,,»np<!s  '• 

..       c  n,A  U  made  unto  OS  wisdom,   and  righteousness, 
who  of  G..d  i»  made  unto  »  He  shall   be 

&e.  is  comparrd    «.th  /--'"'',,,''";;;,"      „,,,-„,.  i 
called  Jehovah  our   r.ghteousne«.       1^3>  '^  .^;, 

r      ™v   rP-ider   a"-ain  to  the  passage  in  Jfremtan 
'S^t  TJ«    c^Jer^salem   also  is  called    "Jehovah 
o"  Lhte'ousness,"    and  to  the  phrase  ■' .-.  uacle  unto  us  of 
0;;^ound  in  the  passage   in  question    an     e..pressmg 
the  inferiority  of  Jesus  to  God.    AUo2  Cor_^-^, 
we  might  be   made  .he   righteousness  of  God    in   h.m, 
v\e  unb"*^  ,    ,    \\  Thrknans  mav  be  made  the 

where  St.  Paul  says,  that  all  Christians  may 

'••r  B:;;:1  ::;:l;-d  Trinitarian  commentator  re- 
nins the  common  version  of  Jere.iah  -■";f '  ""^^^  JP'^^ 
it   to   Jesus,    whom   he    supposes    to   be       Jehovah 
•JLusnes"     But  in  cb.  txxiii.   10.   where  the   con- 
:;Sr::r  the  origmal  Hebrew  is  precisely  the  same,  he 


^1 


»< 


JUT 

alters  the  version,  and  thus  renders  it  in  the  margin,  ''  he 
who  shall  call  her  is  Jehovah  our  righteousness,"  instead 
of  applying  the  phrase  "Jehovah  our  righteousness"  to 
Jerusalem,  in  the  same  manner  as  he  had  applied  it  to 
Jesus  in  the  former  passage. — I  therefore  deem  it  neces- 
sary to  give  the  original  Hebrew  of  both  texts,  and  a  verbal 
translation  of  them.  The  reader  will  judge  how  strongly  the 
judgment  of  the  learned  Commentator  was  biassed  in  sup- 
port of  a  favourite  doctrine.  Jer.  xxiii.  6,  nnn'  j^mn  rn^s 
upny  mn^  ixy  "^b^n  iniy  nn  hddS  puf'  Sk-\k^'i  "  In  his 
days  shall  be  saved  Judah,  and  Israel  shall  dw^ll  in  safety, 
and  this  his  name  which  (man)  shall  call  him,  Jehovah 
our  righteousness."     Jer.   xxxiii.    16,  yv/)r^   ann  cd^d^3 

"  In  those  days  shall  be  saved  Judah,  and  Jerusalem  shall 
dwell  in  safety,  and  this  (name)  which  (man)  shall  call 
her,  Jehovah  our  righteousness." 

In  altering  the  common  translation  of  the  latter  pas- 
sage, Mr.  Brown  first  disregards  the  stop  after  n^  n y 
that  is,  "  shall  call  her ;"  which  by  separating  the  two 
parts  of  the  sentence,  prevents  Jehovah  from  being  em- 
ployed as  the  agent  of  the  verb  "  shall  call."  2ndly,  He 
entirely  neglects  the  established  mode  of  construction,  by 
leaving  ni  or  "  this,"  untranslated,  and  by  omitting  to 
point  out  the  name  by  which  Jerusalem  should  be  called. 
3dly,  He  totally  overlooks  the  idiom  of  the  Hebrew,  in 
which  verbs  are  often  employed  unaccoujpanied  with  their 
agent,  when  no  specific  agent  is  intended,  as  appears  from 
the  following  passages : — 

Gen.  XXV.  26,  W};  3p;?3  rninx  n^i  rn«  [xv']  «vt  p  nnx^ 
2W  "^^^  «y^  "  And  after  that  came  his  brother  out,  and 
his  hand  took  hold  on  Esau's  heel,   and  (man)  called  his 


\^ 


J88 
name  Jacob."     2  Sanuel  ii.  16,   n.nnnjr.^K^^  »•«  ipm- 

.,;on  "  And  ihey  caught  every  one  Ins  fellow  by  the 
head,  and  thrust  his  sword  in  his  fe"-'f,  f  ^ '  ^  „\^J^ 
fell  down  together  :  wherefore  (.nan)  called  that  place 
Helkath  Hazurem,  which  is  in  Gibeon."  Gen«i,  xv..  H, 
,^,  ,nS  nw  ^wS  «7  p  Sy      "  Wherefore  (man)   called  the 

well  Beer-lahai-roi." 

They  again   adduce  7wmft  xiv.  23,  "  Unto  me  (God) 
every  knee  shall  bow,    every  tongue  shall  swear"-com- 
pered  with  Roman,  xiv.  10,  12,  "  But  why  dost  thou   ,udge 
ihy  brother  >  or  why  dost  thou  set  at  nought  thy  brother 
For  we  all  shall  stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ. 
For  it   is  written,  As  I  live,  salth  the    Lord,  every  knee 
shall  bow  10  me,   and  every  tongue  shall  confess  to  God. 
So  then  every  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of  h.mself  to 
God  "     Between  the  Prophet  and  the  Apostle  there  is  a 
perfect  agreement  in  substance,   since  both  declare  that  .t 
is  to  God  that  every  knee   shall  bow,  and  every  tongue 
shall  confess,  through  hin.  before  whose  judgment-seat  we 
shall  all   stand  :-for  at  the  same  time  both  Jesus  and  his 
Apostles  iuformus,   thai  we  n.ust  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-scat of  Christ,   because  the  Father  has  committed 
the  office   of  final  judgment  to  him.-From  this  passage, 
thev  say,  it  appears  that  Jesus  swore  by  himself,  and  that 
thereby  he  is  proved  to  be  God,  according  to  the  rule,  that 
it  is  God  only  that  can  swear  by  himself.     But  how  can 
they  escape  the  context,  which  expressly  informs  us,  thai 
■the  Lord"  (Jehovah,)  and  not  Jesus,  swore  in  this  man- 
ner >    We  must  not  however  overlook  what  the  Apostle 
says  in  his  epistle  to  the  r/.i%«a»s,  cli.  ii.  9-11,  where 
be  declares,  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  shall 


289 


bow  and  every  tongue  shall  confess  ;  but  neither  must 
we  forget,  that  Jesus  is  declared  to  have  been  exalted  to 
these  honours  by  God,  and  that  the  only  confession  re- 
quired is  that  he  is  Lord,  which  office  confession  of  his 
dignity  is  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father.  9,  '*  Where- 
fore God  also  hath  highly  exalted  him,  and  given  him  a 
name  which  is  above  every  name  ;  10,  That  at  the  nan»e  of 
Jesus  every  knee  shall  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and 
things  in  earth,  and  things  under  the  earth  ;  11,  And  that 
every  tongue  shall  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the 
glory  of  God  the  Father." 

Some  have  adopted  a  most  extraordinary  way  of  esta- 
blishing the  deity  of  Jesus.  Any  epithet  or  act,  however 
common  it  may  be,  ascribed  to  God  in  the  Sacred  Writings, 
and  also  to  Christ  in  the  New  Testament,  is  adduced  by 
them  as  a  proof  of  his  deity  ;  and  I  observe  with  the  ut- 
most surprise,  that  the  prejudice  of  many  Christians  in 
favour  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  induces  them  to  lay 
stress  upon  such  sophisms.  For  instance,  Isaiah  xliii.  3, 
"  For  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  the  Holy  one  of  Israel,  thy 
Saviour,"  compared  with  2  Peter  iii.  18,  "  Our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  The  conclusion  they  draw  from 
these  passages  is,  that  unless  Jesus  were  God,  he  could  not 
be  a  Saviour :  but  how  futile  this  reasoning  is  will 
clearly  appear  from  the  following  passages  :  JVehemiah 
ix.  27,  "  Thou  gavest  them  saviours,  who  saved  them." 
Obad,  27,  "  And  saviours  shall  come  up  on  Mount  Zion." 
2  STings  xiii.  5,  "  And  the  Lord  gave  Israel  a  Saviour,  so 
they  went  out  from  under  the  hand  of  the  Syrians  :  and 
ijie  children  of  Israel  dwelt  in  their  tents,  as  beforetime." 
Isaiah  xix.  19,  20,  "  In  that  day  shall  there  be  an  altar  to 
the  Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  a  pillar  af 
the  border  thereof  to  the  Lord.     And  it  shall  be  for  a  sign 

40 


V 


•2U0 

a..d  Ibr  a  witness  unto  the  Lord   of  Hosts  in  the  land  of 
4ypt  :  for  they  shall  cry  unto  the  Lord  because  of  .  e 
oppressors,  and  he  shall  send  them  a  savour,  and  a  great 
Z,  and  he  shall  deliver  then,."     If  this  argume.vt   pos- 
sesses any  force,  then  it  would  lead  us  to  acknowledge  the 
dehy   not  only  of  Jesus,  but  that  of  those  different  .nd.v.- 
Ss  to  whoJthe.enu  "  Saviours"  or  "  Bav-our    .^appl. 
edin  the  above  citations.  The  phrase  .n  ha>nh,      Bes.d 
„,e  there  is  no  Saviour."  is  easily  accounted  for  by  con 
dering,  that  all  those  who  have  been  instrumental  .n  effect- 
Z   he  deliverance   of  their  fellow  creatures  from  ev.l    o 
whatever  nature,  were  dependent  themselves  upon  God,  and 
only  instruments  in  his  hands  ;  and  thus  all  appearance  of 
.  inconsisience  is  removed. 

Again,  Fs.  xxiii.  1,  "  Jehovah  is  my  Shepherd  -com- 
pared with  John  X.  16,  •'  And  other  sheep  1  have,  wh.ch 
are  not  of  [this]  fold  :  them  also  I  must  br.ng  and 
:,"y  shall  heir  Jy  voice  ;  and  there  shall  be  one  fold,  and 
one  Shepherd."  In  the  former  text,  Dav.d  declared  God 
,0  be  hlfshepherd  or  protector;  in  the  "»«"; J-- ^P^^ 
sents  himself  as  the  one  shepherd  of  the  one  fold  of  Chns- 

,ia„s,some   of  whom  were  already  ""^f'*  ^°  ^:r:i;.t 
others  were  afterwards  to  become  converts  :   b"'  Tr.n.ta 
,-.an  writers  thus  conclude  from  these  passages  :.f  Chnst 
be  not  one  with  Jehovah,   he  could  not  be  called  a  Shp 
herd,   and   thus   there     would    be    two  shepherd,  :  but  a 
,i   le   retlection  on  the    following   passages  w>ll  conv.nce 
ev..rv  unbiassed  person,  that  Moses  is  called  a  shepherd  m 
il.  manner,  and  his  followers  a  flock  ;  and  that  the  term 
"Shepherd"  is  applied  to  others  also,  without  convey.nff 
,he   idea  of  their  unity    with  Jehovah.     Isaiah  Ixn,.      1, 
» Then    he  remembered  the  days   of  old,    Moses  and  h.s 
people,  saying,    Where  is  he  that  brought  them  up  out  of 


291 


x* 


the  sea  with  the  shepherd  of  his  flock  ?"  Ezekiel  xxxiv. 
23 ,  24,  "  And  1  will  set  up  one  shepherd  over  them,  and 
he  shall  feed  them,  even  my  servant  David  ;  he  shall  feed 
them,  and  he  shall  be  their  shepherd.  And  I  the  Lord 
will  be  their  God,  and  my  servant  David  a  prince  among 
them.  I  the  Lord  have  spoken  it."  If  they  insist  (though 
without  any  ground)  upon  interpreting  the  name  David  as 
put  for  Jesus,  they  must  still  attribute  his  shepherdship 
over  his  flock  to  divine  commission,  and  must  relinquish 
the  idea  of  unity  between  God  the  employer,  and  the 
JVIessiah  his  servant,  Jeremiah  xxiii.  4,  "  I  will  set  up 
shepherds  over  them,  which  shall  feed  them  :  and  they  shall 
fear  no  more,  nor  be  dismayed,  neither  shall  they  be  lack- 
ing, saith  the  Lord." 

Psalm  Ixxviii.  56,  "  They  tempted  and  provoked  the 
most  high  God." — compared  with  [1]  Cor.  x.  9,  "  Neither 
let  us  tempt  Christ,  as  some  of  them  also  tempted."  They 
thus  conclude  :  the  former  passage  declares  the  most 
high  God  to  have  been  tempted  by  rebellious  Israelites, 
and  in  the  latter,  Jesus  is  represented  to  have  been  the 
person  tempted  by  some  of  them,  consequently  Jesus  is 
the  most  high  God.  How  far  cannot  prejudice  lead 
astray  men  of  sense  !  Is  it  not  an  insult  to  reason,  to  infer 
the  deity  of  Jesus  from  the  circumstance  of  his  being  in 
common  with  God,  tempted  by  Israel  and  others  ?  Are 
we  not  all,  in  common  with  Jesus,  liable  to  be  tempted 
both  by  men  and  by  Satan  ?  Hebrews  iv.  15,  "  For  we 
have  not  an  high  priest  who  cannot  be  touched  with  the 
feeling  of  our  infirmities  ;  but  was  in  all  points  tempted 
like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin.-'  Genesis  xxii.  1,  "And 
it  came  to  pass  after  these  things,  that  God  did  tempt 
Abraham"  Can  the  liability  to  temptation  common  to 
God,  to  Jesus,  to  Abraham,  and  to  all  mankind,  be  of  any 


Ll 


''"^ 


•292 

avail  to  prove  the  divinity  and  unity  of  these  respective 

^t:l1  Zr ;::--  .ith  God  .  spo^e.  ag^-nst 
Jhe   etuious  Israelites.     J^^^nL  xxi.  5,  "And  t  e  peo- 
1  (Israel)  spoke  against  God,  and  aga.nst  Moses        Are 
1  «concll   nponthis  ground,  tl.at  [because]  God  a 
veil  as  Moses  .s  declared  to  l.ave  been  spoken  agau.^t  by 
srae     that  Moses  therefore  is  God  hiu.sel.?  In  the  sau, 
"xtt"    ea  by  the,„,we  find  the  n.ost  high  G-'  P-"  «^ 
r,!olrthev  tempted  and  provoked  the  most  h.gh  God)- 
„e^  fi       7L  and  D^vid  provoked  at  di.lerent  t.nes^ 
Z     ,     ."     i    1    "  And  Satan  stood  up  against  Israel,  and 
JViimAfs  XXI.  1,      Ami  oa  r,,   .i-l    "  It  went  i  1 

nrovoked  David  ;"  and  Psalm  cv..  32,  33,      U  wet^t 
provoivcu  7  |,Hr-»ii>ie   thev  provoked   his 

with  Moses  for  their  sake, .  '*'^""**'  . ''  ',  .'^,.  .,  j;.,, 
cDirit  so  that  he  spake  unadvisedly  with  his  hps.  Can 
anyone  from  .he  circumstance  of  Moses  and  l>av.d  havuig 

Zl  the  subjects   of  P^- j-;-— 7;  ,^01- 
be  justified  in  attempting  to  prove  the  aeiiy 

"' f1  '  Usaiah^  hv.  5,  "  Thy  Maker  is  thine  husband,  the 
Lord  of  hosts  in  his  name"-compared  -|^  J*"^"  ";;  f ' 
»  He  that  hath  the  bride  is  the  bridegroom,"  he       [Eph.] 
,  23    "  For  the  husband  is  the  head  of  the  wi.e    even  as 
y.Zi,      rori         ,.,.  rh„rrh"  8ic.     From  these  they 
Christ  is  the  head  of  the  Church,    Kc. 
•  t.r     thit  as   the  Church  is  one  br.de,  so  on  the  o  her 
'htd  th    e    s  „ne  husband,  who  is  termed  in  one  place 
rod      ndn  another  place   Christ.     My   readers  will  be 
Seied  to  examine  the'language  employed  ^  these  two  .„- 
please.!  to  exa  represented  as  the  husband  of 

stances :  m   the  one    God  .s     P  ^^^^^^^  ^^  ^^ 

,       ,„  his  creatures    and  in   le  other    C   ^^^^^^^^^  ^  ^^^^^   .^^ 

t     :re    an  io  a  i.y  of  authority  evidently  ascribed  to 
td  a    '  .0  J       •     Moreover  Christ  himself  shows  the 


29^ 


relation  that  existed  between  liim  and  his  Church,  and 
himself  and  God,  in  John  xv.  1,  "  I  am  the  true  vine,  and 
my  Father  is  the  husbandman" — [5,]  "I  am  the  vine,  ye 
are  the  branches."  Woidd  it  not  be  highly  unreasonable 
to  set  at  defiance  tlie  distinction  drawn  by  Jesus  between 
God,  himself  and  his  Church,  and  to  attempt  a  conclusion 
directly  contrary  to  his  authority,  and  unsupported  by  re- 
velation ? 

Revelation  xxli  13,  "  I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,  the  begin- 
ning and  the  end,    tlie  first  and  the  last" — C(»mpared  with 
Isaiah  xliv.  6,  *' Thus   saiih  the  Lord  the  King  of  Israel, 
and  his  redeemer  the  L<»rd  of  hosts  ;  1  am  the  first,    and 
1  am  the  last  ;  and  besides  mo  there  is  no  God."     From  a 
comparison  of  these  verses  they  conclude,  that  there  is  no 
God  besides   him  who  is  the  first  and  the  last  ;  but  Jesus 
is  the  first  and  the  last  ;  therefore  besides  Jesus   there  is 
no  other  God.     I  must  embrace  this  opportunity  of  laying 
before  my  readers  the  context  of  the  verse  in  Revelation, 
which  will,   I  presume,   show  to  every  unbiased  mind  how 
the  verse  in  question  has  been  misapplied  ;  since  the  verse 
cited  in  defence  of  the  deity  of  Jesus,  when  considered  in 
relation  to  the   passages  that  precede  and  follow  it,  most 
clearly  declares  his  inferiority  and  his  distinct  nature  from 
the  Father      Revelation  xxii.  6,  "  And   he  (the  angel)  said 
unto    me,  These  sayings   are  faithful   and    true  :  and  the 
Lord  God   of  the   holy  prophets  sent    his  angel  to  show 
unto  his  servants  the   things    which  must  shortly  be  done. 
7,  Behold,  I  come  quickly  :  blessed  is  he  that  keepeth  the 
sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book.  8,   And  1  John  saw 
these  things  and  heard  them.     And  when  1  had  heard  and 
seen,  I  fell  down  to  worship   before  the  feet  of  the  angel 
who  showed  me  these  things.     9,  Then  saith  he  unto  me, 
See  thou  do   it  not  :  for   I  am  thv  fellow  servant,  and   of 


29 'I 


J95 


thy  brethren  the  prophets,  and  of  them    whicli   keep  the 
sayings   of  this  book  :  worship  God.      10,  And  lie  saith 
unto  me,    Seal  not    the   sayings  of  the   prophecy  of  this 
book  :  for  the  time  is  at  hand.     11,   He  that  is  unjust,  let 
him    be    unjust  still  :  and  he  which  is    filthy,  let  him  be 
liUhy  still:  and  he  that  is   righteous,  let  him  be  righteous 
still  :  and  he  that  is  holy,  let  him  be  holy  still.      12,   And, 
behold,   I   come  quickly  ;  and  my   reward  is   with  me,   to 
give  every  man  according  as  his  work  shall  be.     13,  I  am 
Alpha   and  Omega,  the  beginning  and   the  end,    the  first 
and  the  last.     14,  Blessed  are  they  that  do  his  command- 
ments,  that  they  may  have  right  to  the  tree  of  life,  and 
may   enter   in  through    the    gates  into  the  city.     15,  For 
without  are  dogs,    and  sorcerers,   and  whoremongers,  and 
murderers,  and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  andmaketh 
a  lie.     16,  I    Jesus    have  sent  mine   angel  to  testify  nnto 
vou  these  things  in  the  churches.     1  am  the  root  and  the 
offspring  of  David,  and  the  bright  morning  star." 

If  they  ascribe  verse  13,  ("  I  am  Alpha   and  Omega," 
&c.,)  to  Jesus,  and  not  to  the  angel  mentioned  in  the  above 
passage,  they   must  also  unavoidably  ascribe  to  Jesus  the 
passage  coming  Immediately   before  or  after  it,  including 
of  course   verse    the  9th,  "  Then   saith   he  unto    me,  See 
thou  do  it  not  :  for  1  am  thy  fellow-servant,"  &c.,  for  there 
is  but  one  agent  described  by    the  pronoun    "  He"   in  the 
whole  train  of  the  verses  above  quoit-d,   who  is  pointed  out 
clearly  by  the   repetition  of  the  phrase,  "  B.  hold    I  come 
quickly,"   in  verses  7th  and  l2th.       In    this  case  the  pas- 
sage, although   it  speaks  of  Jesus  as  Alpha  and  Omega, 
&€.,  yet  must   be  considered  as   denying  him  the  divine 
nature,    and   ranking  him   among  the  chosen    servants  of 
God,  ("  For   I   am  thy  fellow-servent.")     If  they  ascribe 
all  the  verses  of  chap.  xxii.  as  far  as  verse  the  16th.  to  the 


fm. 


angel,   they  cannot  justify  themselves  in    founding  their 
conclusion  with  regard    to   the  deity   of  Jesus  upon  the 
force  of  verse  the  13th,  "I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,"  &;c. 
which  in   the   latter  case  can  bear  no  relation  to   Christ, 
since  their  system  requires  them  to  apply  it  to  an  inferior 
angel.     I  beg  the  attention  of  u)y  readers   to  five  particu- 
lar circumstances  in  this  instance.     1st,   That  the  angel 
whom  the  Lord  sent,  as  intimated  in  verse  the  6th,  was 
intended    to    show    his   servants   in     general    things    that 
would  shortly   happen ;  and  the  angel   sent  by  Jesus,  as 
found  in  verse  19ih,  was  to  testify  to  John  and  other  dis- 
ciples the  things  relating  to    the   churches.     2dly,  Jesus 
declares  in  verse  16th,   and  in  the  subsequent  verses,  that 
he  is  the  offspring  of  David,  and  that  it  is  God  that  has 
the  power  of  punishing  any  one  who  either  takes  away 
from  or  adds  any  thing  to  his  revelation.     3dly,  That  the 
passage  in  Revelation  xxii.  13,   is  not  parallel  to  that  con- 
tained in  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  xliv.  6,  since  the  phrase 
"  Besides  me  there  is  no   God,''  which  is  found  in  the  lat- 
ter, and  upon  which  the  whole  controversy  turns,  is  not 
contained   in  the  former.     4thly,    That   when    the   angel 
rejected   the    worship  of   John    addressed    to    himself,  he 
ordered    him    to    worship    God,    without    mentioning' the 
name  either  jointly   or  separately  of  the  Lamb,  by  which 
Jesus    is    distinguished     throughout     the    Revelation  :— 
*'  Worship  God,"  ver.  9.     5thly,   in  the  very  next  verse, 
after  the   speaker,   whether  Jesus   or  an   angel,  describes 
himself  as   Alpha   and  Omega,   he    uses   the   expression, 
"  Blessed   are  tliey  that  do  his  commandments,"   clearly 
indicating  the  exisieme  of  another  being  to  whose  com^ 
mandments  obedience  is  required. 

It  is  worth  noticing  here,  that  the  terms,  "  Alpha  and 
Omega,  beginning  and  end,"  are  in  a  finite  sense  justly 


f       * 


/ 


•il, 


296 


applicable  to  Jesus  as  ihe  first  of  all  created  existences, 
and  the  last  of  those  who  will  be  required  to  resign  the 
authority  with  which  he  is  investtd  by  the  Father.  See 
Colossians  i.  15,  "  The  first-born  of  every  creature ;" 
1  Corinthians  xv.  28,  "  Then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  be 
subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things  under  him." 

Isaiah\\.  10,  "  Behold,  the  Lord  God  will  come  with  a 
strong  hand,  and  his  arm  shall  rule  for  him  :  behold,  his 
reward  is  with  him,  and  his  work  before  him" — is  com- 
pared with  Revelation  xxii.  12,  '*  I  come  quickly  ;  and  my 
reward  is  with  me."  From  the  circumstance  of  the  com- 
mon application  of  the  phrase,  "  his  reward  is  with  him,'' 
to  God  and  to  Jesus,  the}  infer  the  deity  of  the  latter  ;  in 
answer  to  which  I  beg  to  refer  my  readers  to  the  foregoing 
paragraphs  illustrating  verse  llth,  which  immediately 
precedes  the  verse  in  question  of  the  Revelation,  and  also 
to  John  V.  30,  22,  '*  As!  hear,  I  judge:  and  my  judgment 
is  just;  because  I  seek  not  mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of 
the  Father  who  hath  sent  me.  The  Father  judgeth  no 
man,  but  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son  ;" 
and  to  Matthew  xvi.  27,  "  For  the  Son  of  man  shall  come 
in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  his  angels  ;  and  then  he 
shall  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works."  Do  not 
these  passages  point  out  evidently',  that  the  power  of 
exercising  judgment  and  of  distributing  rewards  has  been 
given  to  Jesus  by  the  Almi^'hty,  and  that  Jesus  possesses 
this  authority  in  behalf  of  the  Father  of  the  universe  ? 

Ephcsians  iv.  8,  "  When  he  (Christ)  ascended  up  on 
high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave  gifts  unto  men" — 
compared  with  Psalm  Ixviii.  18,  "Thou  hast  ascended  on 
high,  thou  hast  led  captivity  captive  :  thou  hast  received 
gifts  for  men,  yea,   for  the  rebellious  also,  that  the  Lord 


f 


291 


*H 


God  might  dwell  among  them."  The  Jews  are  of  opinion 
that  David  in  this  verse  spoke  of  Moses,  who  when  he 
ascended  to  Mount  Sinai,  received  gifts  (i.  e.  the  divine 
commandments)  for  men,  even  for  the  rebellious  Israelites  ; 
in  this  case  the  Apostle  Paul  in  his  epistle,  must  have 
applied  the  verse  in  an  accommodated  sense  to  Jesus. 
The  verse  in  the  Psalm  may  be  directly  applied  to  Jesus, 
who,  on  his  ascension,  received  gifts  of  pardon  even  for 
those  who  had  rebelled  against  him.  Mr.  Brown,  a  cele- 
brated Trinitarian  Commentator,  and  several  others,  con- 
sider the  18th  verse  in  this  Psalm,  and  verse  8th  in  this 
chapter  of  Ephesians,  as  immediately  applicable  to  Jesus 
as  the  Messiah.  But  another  writer,  Mr.  Jones,  with  a 
view  to  establish  the  deity  of  Christ  by  a  comparison  of 
Ephfsians  iv.  8,  with  Psalm  Ixviii.  18,  omits  carefully  the 
latter  part  of  the  verse,  ("  Thou  hast  received  gifts  for 
men,  yea,  for  the  rebellious  also,  that  the  Lord  God  might 
dwell  among  them,")  which  is  altogether  inapplicable  to 
God,  and  quotes  only  the  first  part  of  the  verse,  ("thou 
hast  ascended  on  high,  thou  hast  led  captivity  captive;") 
and  thence  draws  this  conclusion — "  The  Scripture  here 
(in  the  Epistle  referred  to)  expressly  affirms  the  person 
who  ascends,  he.  to  be  the  Lord  God."  From  a  view  of 
the  whole  verse,  the  sense  must,  according  to  this  niode 
of  reasoning,  be  as  follows — "The  person  who  ascended 
on  high,  and  who  received  gifts  for  men,  that  the  Lord  God 
might  dwell  among  them,  is  the  Lord  God ;"  an  interpre- 
tation, which  as  implying  that  the  Lord  God  ascended 
and  received  gifts  from  a  Being  of  course  superior  to  him- 
self, in  order  that  he  might  dwell  among  men,  is  equally 
absurd  and  unscriptural. 

Zechariah  xii.  10,  as  found  in  the  English  Version,  "  In 

41 


■^^ 


1 


hy 


\r 


I?/ 


\ 


1  ' 


'J98 


li,at  day  they  shall  look  upon  me  whom  they  have 
pierced"-compared  with  John  xix.  37,  "They  shall  look 
on  him  whom  .hey  pierced;"  from  which  comparison  he 
has  thus  concluded-"  As  it  stands  in  the  Prophet,  the 
Lord  Jehovah  was  to  be  pierced  ;  so  that  unless  the  man 
Christ  who  hunp  upon  the  cross  was  also  the  Lord  Jeho- 
vah the  EvanaeliM  is  found  to  be  a  false  witness  in 
applying  to  him  a  prophecy  that  could  not  possibly  be  ful- 
filled" in  him."  I.,  order  to  show  the  source  of  Mr  Jones  s 
error,  I  beg  to  lay  before  my  readers  the  verse  m  Hebrew, 
and  a  correct  translation  into  English. 

'S«  ra-3ni  D-:>3n.ii  ;n  nn  oV^n-  2vy  ^i'y  rn  n>3  hy  -WflBi 

"  And  1  will  pour  upon  the  house  of  UaviJ,  and  upon 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusaleai,tlie  spirit  <.f  grace  and  of  sup- 
plication :  and  ih.-v  shall  look  toivuni  me  on  account  of  him 
whom  they  have  pierced,  and  th-y  shall  mourn  for  him  as 
one  ,no..rneth  for  h.s  own  son,  and  shall  be  in  bitterness 
for  him,  as  one  that  .s  in  bitterness  for  his  first-born.' 
This  translation  is  s-rongly  confirmed  by  the  Septuagmt, 
whose  words  I  subjoin  with  a  literal  rendering— 

«  And  they  shall  look   towards  me,  on  account  of  those 

whom  thev  piirced." 

In  the  Prophet  the  Lord  speaks  of  Israel  at  the  approach 
of  their  restoration,  when  they  will  look  up  to  God  for 
mercv  on  account  of  their  cruelty  to  the  Messiah,  whom 
they  pi"ced,  and  for  whom  they  will  mourn  and  lament. 


r 


t 


} 


I 


299 


Hence  the  prophecy  in  question  has  been  fulfilled  in  Jesus, 
without   representing    the  Lord   (Jehovah)  as   the  object 
pierced  ;  and  consequently  no  false  testimony  is  chargea- 
ble  upon    John   the  Evangelist,    who,   by    changing  the 
object  of  the  verse  from  "  me"  found  in  the  Hebrew  and 
Septuagint,  into  «  him,"  we  may  suppose  had  in  view  the 
general  import  rather  than  the  particular  expressions    of 
the  prophecy,  pointing  out  that  they  looked  to  the  Mes- 
siah also,    whom  they  had  pierced.     Without  referring  to 
the  Hebrew  phrase,  which  shows  beyond  doubt  the  inac- 
curacy of  the  English  translation  of  the  verse,    common 
sense  is,  I  presume,  sufficient  to  show,  that  since   in  the 
Jast  two  clauses  in  the  verse  under  consideration  the  Lord 
God  speaks  of  the  Messiah  in  the  third  person — ("  for  him 
they    (i,  e.  the  Israelites)    will    mourn   and    lament,")  he 
must  be  supposed  to  have  spoken  of  the  same  third  person 
as  pierced  by  them  unjustly,  and  thus  to  have  pointed  out 
the  cause    of  their  lamentation.     If    Jth'ivah    had  been 
pierced,  he  would    have   been    mentioned    throughout  in 
the  first  person,  also  as  th»-  object  of  lamentation  and  bit- 
terness. 

1  Peter  W.Q,  "  V'hp*-fore  is  it  also  contained  in  the 
Scripture,  Behold,  1  lay  in  Zion  a  clnef  corner-stone, 
elect,  precious  :  and  he  that  believeth  on  him  shall  not  be 
confounded.  7,  Unto  you  therefore  which  believe  he  is 
precious  :  but  unto  them  who  are  disobedient,  the  stone 
which  the  builders  disallowed,  the  same  is  made  tlie  head 
of  the  corner,  8,  And  a  stone  of  stumbling,  and  a  rork  of 
offence,  even  to  them  which  stumble   at  the  word,   being 

disobedient ;  whereunto    also     they    were     appointed" 

compared   with   Isaiah  xxviii.  16,  "  Therefore   thus  saith 
the  Lord  God,  Behold,  1  lay  in  Zion  for  a  foundation,  a 


A 


I 


f, 


i 


m 


f 


'/ 


300 

stone,  a  tried  stone,  a  precious  corner-stone,  a  sure  loun- 
dation  ;  he  that  believeth  shall  not  make  haste  ;  and 
Isaiah  viii.  13,  "  Sanctify  the  Lord  of  hosts  himself ;  let 
him  be  your  fear,  and  let  him  be  your  dread.  14  And 
be  shall  be  for  a  sanctuary ;  but  for  a  stone  of  stumbhng, 
and  for  a  rock  of  offence,  to  both  the  houses  of  Israel  ; 
for  a  gin  and  for  a  snare  to  the   inhabitants  of  Jerusalem 

These  passages  show,  that   the   Lord  God    placed   the 
Messiah    as  a  corner-stone  for  the  temple,  and  that  who- 
ever  stumbles  at  that  stone   so  exalted  by  the  Alm.ghty, 
stumbles  at  or  disobey,  him  who  has  thus  placed  it.     But 
Mr.   Jones    omits    the  words   found  in,    P^er  ii.  6,    and 
haiah   xxviii.   16,  "  I  lay   in  Zion  a  chief  corner-stone, 
precious,"  &c.  which  show  the  created  nature  of  the  Mes- 
slab,  and  after  quoting  a    part  of  vers.  7  and  8  of  1  Peter, 
ch    ii    ("  The  stone    w hich  the   builder   disallowed,    the 
same  is  made  the  head  of  the  corner,  and  a  stone  of  stum- 
bV|„>.    and  a  rock   of  offence,")  and   only  verse  13th  and 
part'of  the  14th    of  ch.  viii.  of  Isaiah,   he  has  thus   con- 
eluded  — "  This  stone  of  stumbling  and   rock  of  offence, 
as  it  appears  from  the  latter   text,  (the  text  in   Peter;)  is 
no  other   than  Christ,   .he  same  stone   which  the    builders 
rejected.     Therefore  Christ  is  the  Lord  of  hosts  himself. 
-Here  the  Apostle  Peter,  in  conformity  with  the  Prophet 
represents  God  as   the  founder   of  the  corner-stone,    and 
Jesus  as  the  same  corner-stone,   which,  though  it  be  disal- 
lowed  by   the  Jews,  yet  is  made  by  the  same  founder,  the 
bead  of  \he  corner  ;  but  the  Jews  from   their  disobedience 
stumbled  directly  at   the  stone  so  exalted,    rendering  it  a 
stone  of  stumbling  and  a  rock  ol  offence ;  and  hereby  they 
stumbled    sccondaril>  at   the  founder    of  this  sione,    and 
offended  the  Lord  God  ;  who,    though  he  was  the  rock  ol 


> 


> 


;301 


defence  of  Israel,   (rock  of  refuge,  Psalm  xciv.  24,)    be- 
came a  stone  of  stumbling  and  [a]  rock  of  offence. 

Thus  in  Luke  x.  IG,  Jesus  declares  to  his  disciples, 
<*  He  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth  me  ;  and  he  that  de- 
spiseth  me,  despiseth  him  that  sent  me  ;"  intimating  by 
these  words,  that  contempt  for  the  holy  doctrines  which 
Christ  commissioned  his  disciples  to  teach,  argued  con- 
tempt for  him  by  whom  Christ  himself  w as  sent ;  but  no 
one  will  thence  infer  the  deity  of  those  disciples.  In  vers. 
G  and  7  in  question,  and  in  ver.  4  of  the  same  chapter  of 
Peter,  ("  To  whom  coming  as  unto  a  living  stone,  disal- 
lowed indeed  of  men,  but  chosen  of  God  and  precious,") 
Jesus  is  distinctly  declared  to  be  "  a  stone  of  stumbling," 
**  a  living  stone  chosen  of  God  ;"  the  indefinite  article 
"  a"  here  denoting  that  he  is  only  one  of  many  such  stones. 
It  is  surprising  that  Mr.  Jones  could  overlook  these 
phrases,  and  conclude  upon  the  identity  of  Jesus  with 
God  from  metaphorical  language,  which  represents  God 
as  "  a  stumbling  stone"  of  Israel,  and  Jesus  a  stumbling 
stone  of  those  who  never  believed  him.  That  there  is 
nothing  peculiar  in  Jesus  being  called  a  stone  or  a  shep- 
herd, see  Genesis  xlix.  24,  where  in  a  metaphorical  sense 
Joseph  is  called  **  the  shepherd  and  the  stone  of  Israel." 

The  Hebrew  language,  in  common  with  other  Asiatic 
tongues,  frequently  indulges  in  metaphor ;  and  conse- 
quently the  Old  Testament,  written  in  that  language, 
abounds  with  expressions  which  cannot  be  taken  in  their 
literal  sense.  This  indeed  Jesus  himself  points  out  in 
John  X.  34 — 36,  in  which  he  justifies  the  assumption  of 
the  title  of  Sun  of  God,  to  denote  that  he  iias  sanctified 
and  sent  of  the  Father,  by  showing  that  in  the  Scriptures 
the  name  even  of  God  was  sometimes  metaphorically  ap- 
plied to  men  of  power   or  exalted  rank.     Hence  we  find 


'I 


,-X.i 


1 


302 


303 


epithets  which  in  their  strict  sense  in  their  most  common 
application  are  peculiar  to  God,  applied  to  inferior  beings, 
as  I  have  already  noticed.  But  the  Scripture  avoids 
affording  the  least  pretext  of  misunderstanding  the  real 
nature  of  such  objects,  by  various  adjuncts  and  epithets 
of  obvious  meaning,  quite  inapplicable  to  the  Deity.  It 
is  melancholy,  however,  to  o  serve,  how  frequently  men 
overlook  the  idiom  of  the  language  of  Scripture,  and  (ap- 
parently misled  by  the  force  of  preconceived  notions)  set 
aside  every  expression  that  modifies   those  that   suit  their 

peculiar  ideas. 

Were  we  to  admit  common  phrases  applied  both  to  God 
and   to  Jesus  as  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of  the  latter,  we 
must  upon  the    same   ground  be  led  to  acknowledge  the 
deity  of  Moses,  of  David,  and  of  other  Prophets,  who  are 
in   common   with    God  the   subjects  of  peculiar    phrases. 
Moses  in  Deut,  xxx.  15,  declares,  "  See,  1  have  set  before 
thie    this    day    life  and  good,   and    deaili   .»nd   evil."     So 
Jehovah  declares  in  JtremWi  xxi.  8,  •'  Benoid,!  set  before 
you  the  way  of  life,  and  the  way  of  death."  In  conformity 
to  this  mode  of  argument  adopted  by  Trinitarian   writers, 
we  should   thus    conclude   from    these    passages— unless 
Moses   were  one  with    Jehovah,    he  could   not  in  his  own 
name  employ  the  same  authoritative  phrase  >vhich,  is  used 
by  Jehovah.     In   the   same   manner  the   term   worship   is 
equally  applied  to  God  and  David  in  Chronicles  xxix.  20, 
"  And  David  said  to  all   the  congregation.  Now  bless  the 
Lord  your  God.     And   all  the  congregation    blessed    the 
Lord   God  of  their  fathers,  and  bowed  down  their  heads, 
and    worshipped  the  Lord  and  the  king."     Whence,  ac- 
cording to  their  mode  of  argument,   every  one    must  find 
himself  justified   in   drawing    the   following    conclusion  : 
God  is  the  only  object  of  worship— but  the  term  worship 


is  in  the  Bible  applied  to  David— David  must  therefore  be 
acknowledged  as  God. 

I  have  now  noticed  all  the  arguments  founded  on  Scrip- 
ture that  1  have  heard  of  as   advanced  in   support  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  except  such  as  appeared  to  me  so 
futile  as   to  be  unwortin  of  remark  ;  and  in  the  course  of 
my  examination  have  plainly  staled  the  grounds  on  which 
I  conceive  them  to  he  inadmissible.     Perhaps  my  opinions 
may  subject  me  to  the  severe  « ensure  of  those  who  dissent 
from  me,   and  some  will    be   ready  to  discover   particular 
motives  for  my  presuming  to  differ  from  the  great  majority 
of  Christian   teachers   of  the  present   day  in  my  view    of 
Christianity,  with  the  doctrines  of  which  I    have  become 
but  recently  acquainted. — Personal   interest  can  hardly  be 
alleged   as  likely  to  have   actuated   me,  and  therefore  the 
love  of  distinction  or  notoriety  may  perhaps  be  resorted  to, 
to  account    for  conduct  which  they  wish  it  to   be  believed 
honest  conviction  could  never  direct.      In  reply  to  such  an 
accusation,  I  can  only  protest  in  the  most  solemn  manner, 
that  even  in  the  belief  that  1  have  been  successful  in  com- 
bating the  doctrine  of  Trinitarians,  I   cannot  assume  to 
myself  the  smallest  merit  : — for  \Uiat  credit  can  be  gained 
in  proving  that  one  is  not  three,    and  that  the  same  being 
cannot  be  at  once  man  and  God ;  or  in  opposing  those  who 
maintain,    that  all  who   do  not   admit  doctrines  so  incom- 
prehensible must  be  therefore  subjected  by  the  All-merciful 
to   eternal   punishment  ^  It  is  too  true  to  be  denied,  that 
we  are  led  by    the    force  of  the    senses  to  believe  many 
things   that  we  cannot  fully   understand.     But  where  the 
evidence  of  sense  does  not  compel  us,  how  can  we  believe 
what  is  not  only  beyond  our  comprehension,  but  contrary 
to  it  and  to  the  common    course  of  nature,  and  directly 
against  revelation  ;  which  declares  positively  the  unity  of 


3011 

God  as   well  as   his    incomprehensibility  ;  but  no  where 
ascribes  to  him  any  number  of  persons,   or  any  portion  of 
magnitude  ?  Job  xxxvi.  26,  "  Behold  God  is  great,   and 
we  know  him  not."     Ch.  xxxvii.  23,  "  Touching  the  Al- 
mighty,   we  cannot  find  him  out."     Psnlm  cxlv.  3,  "  His 
greatness    is  unsearchable."      Neither    are   my   attempts 
owing   to  a  strong  hope  of  removing  early  impressions 
from  Uie  breasts  of  those,  whose  education  instilled  certain 
ideas  into  their   minds  from    the   moment    they    became 
capable  of  receiving  them  ;  for  notwithstanding  great  and 
long-continued   exertions  on  my  part  to  do  away  Hindoo 
polytheism,  though  palpably  gross  and  absurd,  my  success 
bas  been  very  partial.     This  experience,   therefore,  it  may 
besugtrested,  ouaht  to  have  been  sufficient  to  discourage 
me  from  anv  other  atten.pt  of  the  kind  ;  but  it  is  my  reve- 
rence for  Christianity,  ami  for  the  author  of  this  religion, 
that  has  induced  me  to  endeavour  to   vindicate  it  from  the 
charge   of  Polytheism  as  far  as  my    limited  capacity  and 
knowledge  extend.     It  is  indeed  mortifying  to  my  feelings 
to  find  a  religion,  that  from  its  sublime  doctrines  and  pure 
morality  should  be  respected  above  all  other  systems,  re- 
duced almost  to  a  level  with  Hindoo  theology,  merely  by 
human  creeds  and  prejudices;   and  from  this  cause  brought 
to  a  comparison    with  the  Paganism  of  ancient  Greece  ; 
which,  while  it  included  a  plurality  of  Gods,   yet  main- 
ained  that  ou.  i.r..,  or  "  God  is  one,"  and  that  their  nu- 
n^erous  divine  r>^rsons  were  all  comprehended  in  that  one 

Having  derived  my  own  opinions  on  this  subject  en- 
tirely 'from  the  Scriptures  themselves,  I  may  perhaps  be 
excused  for  the  confidence  with  which  1  maintam  them 
against  those  of  so  great  a  majority,  who  appeal  to  the 
same   authoritv    for  theirs  ;  inasn.uch    as  I  attribute  the 


305 


diD'erent  views,  not  to  any  inferiority  of  judgment  com- 
pared with  my  own  limited  ability,  but  to  the  powerful 
effects  of  early  religious  impressions  ;  for  when  these  are 
deep,  reason  is  seldom  allowed  its  natural  scope  in  exa- 
mining them  to  the  bottom.  Were  it  a  practice  among 
Christians  to  study  first  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  found  arranged  in  order,  and  to  acquire  a  knowledge  of 
the  true  force  of  scriptural  phrases  and  expressions  with- 
out attending  to  interpretations  given  by  any  sect ;  and 
then  to  study  the  New  Testament,  comparing  the  one 
with  the  other,  Christianity  would  not  any  longer  be  lia- 
ble to  be  encroached  upon  by  human  opinions. 

I  have  often  observed  that  English  divines,  when  ar- 
guing with  those  that  think  freely  on  religion,  quote  the 
names  of  Locke  and  Newton  as  defenders  of  Christianity  ; 
but  they  totally  forget  that  the  Christianity  which  those 
illustrious  persons  professed,  did  not  contain  the  doctrine 
of  the  .Trinity,  which  our  divines  esteem  as  the  funda- 
mental principle  of  this  religion.  For  the  conviction  of 
the  public  as  to  the  accuracy  of  this  assertion,  I  beg  to  be 
allowed  to  extract  here  a  few  lines  of  their  respective 
works,  referring  ray  readers  to  their  publications  upon  re- 
ligion for  more  complete  information. 

Locke's  Works,  Vol.  VH.  p.  421  :  "  But  that  neither  he 
nor  others  may  mistake  my  book,  this  is  that  in  short 
which  it  says — 1st,  That  there  is  a  faith  that  makes  men 
Christians — 2dly.  That  this  faith  is  the  believing  *  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  to  be  the  Messiah' — 3dly,  That  the  believing 
Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah,  includes  in  it  a  receiving  him  for 
our  Lord  and  King,  promised  and  sent  from  God,  and  so 
lays  upon  all  his  subjects  an  absolute  and  indispensable 
necessity  of  assenting  to    all  that  they  can  attain  of  the 

42 


i>% 


/ 


> 


'JOt> 

knowledge  that  he  taugl.t,  and  of  sincere  obedience  to  all 

that  he  commanded."  . 

Sir  I  Kewton's  Observations  upon  the  Prophecies,  p. 
262  •  "  The  Beasts  and  Elders  therefore  represent  tlie 
Christians  of  all  nations  ;  and  the  worship  of  these  Chris- 
tians  in  their  churches  is  here  represented  under  the  form 
of  worshipping  God  and  the  Lamb  in  the  Temple  Ood 
for  his  benefaction  in  creating  all  things,  and  the  Lamb 
for  his  benefaction  in  redeeming  us  with  his  blood  :-God 
as  sitting  upon  the  throne  and  living  for  ever,  and  the 
Lamb  exalted  above  all  by  the  merits  of  his  death.'| 

It  cannot  be  alleged  that  these  personages,  m  imitation 
of  several  Grecian  philosophers,  published  these  sentiments 
only  in  conformity  to  the  vulgar  opinion,  and  to  the  esta- 
blished religion  of  their  country  ;  for  both  the  vulgar  opi- 
nion and  the  religion  of  the  government  of  England  m 
their  days  were  directly  opposite  to  the  opinions  which 
these  celebrated  men  entertained. 

The  mention  of  the  name  of  Sir  Isaac   Newton,  one  of 
the  greatest  mathematicians  (if  not  the  greatest)  that  ever 
existed,  has  brought   into  my  recollection   a  mathematical 
argument  which  I  some  time  ago  heard  a  divine  adduce  in 
support  of  the  Trinity,  and  which  I   feel  inclined   to  con- 
sider here,   though  1  am  afraid  some  of  my  readers  may 
censure  me  for  repeating  an  argument  of  this  kind.     It  is 
as  follows  :  that  as  three  lines  compose  one  triangle,   so 
three    persons  compose  one  Deity.     It  is  astonishing  that 
a  mind  so  conversant  with  mathematical   truth  as  was  that 
of  Sir  Isaac  Newton,    did  not   discover  this  argument   in 
favour  of  the   possible  existence  of  a  Trinity,  brought  to 
light  by  Trinitarians,  considering  that  it  must  have  lain  so 
much  in  his  way.     If  it   did  occur  to  him,  its  force  mav 


V 


307 


possibly  have  given  way  to  some  such  considerations  a$ 
the  following: — This  analogy  between  the  Godhead  and  a 
triangle,  in  the  first  instance,  denies  to  God,  equally  with 
a  line,  any  real  existence :  for  extension  of  all  kinds,  ab- 
stracted from  position  or  relative  situaiion,  exists  only  in 
idea.  Secondly,  it  destroys  the  unity  which  they  attempt 
to  establish  between  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost ;  for 
the  three  sides  of  a  triangle  are  conceived  of  as  separate 
existences.  Thirdly,  it  denies  to  each  of  the  three  persons 
of  God,  the  epithet  "God,"  inasmuch  as  each  side  cannot 
be  designated  a  triangle  ;  though  the  Father  of  the  universe 
is  invariably  called  God  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term. 
Fourthly,  it  will  afford  to  that  sect  among  the  Hindoos 
who  suppose  God  to  consist  of  four  persons,  an  oppor- 
tunity of  using  the  same  mode  of  arguing,  to  show  the 
reasonableness  of  their  sentiments,  by  comparing  the 
compound  Deity  with  the  four  sides  of  a  quadrilateral 
figure.  Fifthly,  this  manner  of  arguing  may  be  esteemed 
better  adapted  to  support  the  Polytheism  ol  the  majority 
of  Hindoos,  who  believe  in  numerous  persons  under  one 
Godhead  ;  for  instead  of  comparing  the  Godhead  with  a 
triangle,  a  figure  containing  the  fewest  sides,  and  thereby 
proving  the  three  persons  of  the  Godhead,  they  might 
compare  God  with  a  polygon,  more  suitable  to  the  dignified 
rank  of  the  Deity,  and  thus  establish  the  consistency  with 
reason,  of  the  belief,  that  the  Godhead  may  be  composed 
of  numerous  persons.  Sixthly,  this  mode  of  illustration 
would,  in  fact,  equally  suit  the  Atheist  as  the  Polytheist. 
For,  as  the  Trinity  is  represented  by  the  three  sides  of  a 
triangle,  so  the  eternal  revolution  of  nature  without  any 
divine  person  may  be  compared  to  the  circle,  which  is 
considered  as  having  no  sides  nor  angles ;  or.  Seventhly,  as 
some  great  mathematicians  consider  the  circle  as  a  poly- 


«' 


i 


? 


308 

ffon  having  an  infinite  number  of  sides,  the  iHustration  of 
il,e  Trii.it:»rian  dortrine  by  the  form  of  the  triangle  wdl  by 
analogy  justify  those  sects,  who  maintain  the  existence  of 
an  infinite  number  of  persons  in  the  Godhead,  in  referring 
for  an  ilh.s.raiion  ol  their  opinions  to  the  circular,  or 
rather  p.;rhaps  to  the  «lobdar  fifjure,  in  «hich  is  to  be 
found  an  infinity    of  circles,   (onned  each   of  an   infinite 

nu ruber  of  sides. 

As  i  was  concluding  ti.is  Appendix,  a  f/ieud  to  the  doc 
trine  of  the  Trinity  kindly    U  nt  me  Serle's  -  H«rae   Soh- 
tan«."     I  confine  line  my  attention  only  to  four  or  hve 
arguments,  which  the  author  has  addi.ced  in  the  beguinu.g 
of  his  woik,  and   ihal   for  several   reasons.      1st,  Because 
a  deliberate  aiieniion  to  the  nature  o(  the  first-mentioned 
arguments  may    furnish    the   reader   with  a  general   idea 
of  the  rest,   and  justify  me   in   neglecting   them.     2ndly, 
Because  such  of  tlie  others  as  seem  to    me   at  all  worthy 
of  notice  have  been  alre-.idy  considered  and  replied  to  ;  and 
3dly,   Because  1  am  unwilling  to  protract  further  discus- 
sion,  which  has  already  grown  to  a  length  far  beyond  my 

original  intention. 

At  page  10,  Mr.  Serle  alleges,  that  «  God  says  by  Moses 
in  the  book  of  Genesis,   In  the  beginning  God  created  the 
heaven  and  the  earth  ;  and  then  just  afterwards,  the  Spirt 
moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters.  Here  are  three  persons 
in  one  power ;  the  beginning,  God,  and  the  Spirit."    If  a 
bare  mention  of  the  word  -  beginning"  and  "  spirit,"    (or 
properly  speaking,  "  wind,")    in  the    two  first   verses   of 
Genesis,  justifies   the  numbering  of  them  as  two  persons 
of  God,   how   can    we  conscientiously  omit  the   "  wat-r" 
mentioned  in  the  same   verse  as  coexistent  with  "  spirit," 
making  it  the  fourth  person,  and  darkness,   which  is  men- 
tioned before  spirit,  as  a  fifth  person  of  God  :  and  if  under 


il09 


any  pretence  we  are  justified  in  classing  "beginning,"  an 
abji^ract  relation,  as  a  person  of  God,  how  can  we  deny  tlie 
same  dignity  to  the  "end,"  which  is  equally  an  abstract 
relation  f  Nay,  the  very  words  of  chap.  i.  8,  of  Revela- 
tion might  he  quoted  to  prove  one  of  the  persons  of  God 
to  be  the  "ending:"—**!  am  Alpha  and  Omega,  the 
BEGINNING  and  the  ending,  saith  the  Lord,  which  is,  and 
which  was,  and  which  is  to  cosne,  the  Almighty."  We 
have  then  God,  the  Beginning,  the  Spirit,  and  the  Ending, 
four  pers«)ns  at  least  whom  wt-  must  admit  into  the  God- 
head, if  Mr   Serle's  opinion  have  any  foundation. 

Page  12,  "  They  (the  ancient  Chaldee  Jews  and  Caba- 
lists)  expressed  their  idea  ol  the  Trinity  [hy  a  circle  enclosing 
three  jodSf  and  the  point  kametz common  to  each  ;"]  where  the 
three  jods  denote  Jah,  Jah,  Jah,  or  thateach  of  three  persons 
(according  to  our  Athanasian  Creed)  is  by  himself  Jah  or 
Lord  : — the  point  (kameti)  as  common  to  each,  implies  the 
divine  nature  in  which  the  three  persons  equally  existed  ; 
and  the  circle,  inclosing  all,  was  intended  to  exhibit  the 
perfect  unity,  eternity,  and  conjunction,  of  the  whole 
Trinity."  This  type,  if  it  existed  at  any  time,  can  bear 
various  interpretations,  Theistical,  Polytheislical,or  Atheis- 
tical; but  in  Hebrew  and  Chaldee,  die  sign  which  is 
generally  used  to  denote  the  Deity  has  two  jods  only;  a 
reference  to  the  Targums  of  Jonathan  and  Onkelos,  written 
in  the  Chaldee  language,  and  to  other  Targums  in  Hebrew 
and  Chaldee,  will  establish  the  fact  beyond  doubt.  This 
practice,  which,  according  to  Mr.  Serle's  mode  of  arguing, 
establishes  the  duality  of  God,  is  entirely  overlooked  by 
him. 

In  the  same  page  again  he  says,  that  "  in  a  very  ancient 
book  of  the  Jews,  the  (irs^^  person,  or  Hypostasis,  is  de- 
scribed as  nn:)  Kather,  the  crown,   or  admirable  and  pro- 


I 


f 


'«; 


/ 


310 

found   intelligence;    the    second   person  n.Dn  Chochma 
wisdom,  or  the  intelligence  ilUuninating  the  creat.on   and 
the    second   glory;  and   the  third  person  --  Bma  , 
the  sanctifying  intelligence,   the  worker  of  fa.th  and  the 
father  of  it."     He  immediately  after  this  assertion  notices 
in  paKe  13,  -  they  believed,  tanght,  and  adored  three  pn- 
Z!Z\  existences   in    the    Godhead,    which    they   called 
sometimes  nn'O   middolh,    or   properties     and    sometimes 
"..0    sephiroth,    or  numerations:^      The   force    of  truth 
here  impels    the   author   to    contradict    himself  directly ; 
since  he  at  one  time  asserts  that  the  Jews  believed  them 
o  be  the  ihr.e persons  of  God,  and  again  t.rgetting  what 
he  said   he  affirms  tliat  the  Jews  called  ihew  properties,  or 
nurnercition  of  properties.     The  fact  is,  that  when  the  inter- 
course  between  the  Jews  and  Gr.eks  was  great,  the  lor- 
„,er    in  imitation  of  some  of  the  latter,  entertained   the 
idea  that  the  Supreme  Deity  used    ten    superior   intel  i- 
fences  or  qualities  in  the  creation  of  the  world;  namely, 
^3  Crown— noon    Wisdom-nri    Understanding— n^u 
Greatness-niui  Mightiness-P^N.n  Beauty-n.a   Lver- 
lastine-^^n  Glory-iiD'    Foundation-noSo  Kingdom 
But  a  Godhead  consisting  of  ten  persons  not  suiting  Mr. 
Serle^s   hypothesis,   he  omits  the  seven  last,  and  mentions 
only  the  three  first,  which  he  denominates  a  proof  of  the 

'^'Jn  page  14,  Mr.  Serle  represents  "  R.  Simeon  and  the 
famous  Jonathan  treating  upon  the  Trisagion,  or  thrice 
holy  in  the  6th  chapter  of  Isaiah^  as  saying,  "  that  the 
first  Holy  implies  the  Father,  the  second  Holy  the  Son, 
and  the  third  Holy  the  Holy  Ghost."     I  therefore  give  the 

*  This  opinion  is  still  to  be  found  in  the  conversation  as  well  as 
^vrilin-8  of  the  learned  amongst  Eastern  theologians. 


311 


commentary  of  Jonathan,*  which  J  have  been  so  fortunate 
as  to  procure,  in  order  to  show  how  zeal  in  behalf  of  the 
Trinity  has  sometimes  led  men  to  forget  the  claims  of  care 
and  prudence.  Jonathan's  targum  on  the  term  "  Holy" 
thrice  repeated  in   Isaiah  vi.  3,  is  as  follows  :      'DB^a  w^ip 

n^dSj?  ^dS;;Si  aS;?S  "  Holy  in  the  most  high  heavens,  the 
place  of  his  glory — Holy  upon  the  earth,  the  work  of  bis 
power — Holy  for  ever  and  ever  and  ever." 

Again,  in  page  14,  he  says,  that  "  The  Jews  before 
Christ  had  a  title  for  the  Godhead  consisting  of  twelve 
letters,  which  Maimonides,  the  most  learned  of  all  their 
writers,  owns  to  have  been  a  compounded  name,  or  name 
(as  was  common  among  the  Rabbins)  composed  of  the 
initial  letters  of  the  names.  Galatiuus  from  R.  Hakka- 
dosh,  (who  lived  about  A.  D.  150,  or  rather  from  Porche- 
tus  Salvaticus,  or  Raymundus  Martini,)  believes  that  these 
twelve  letters  were  \ffipr\  nni  p  3N  i.  e.  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit. 

There  is  no  impossibility  in  the  existence  of  a  name  of 
God,  consisting  of  twelve  letters,  as  is  stated  to  have  been 
the  case  on  the  authority  of  Maimonides,  because  we  find 
different  names  of  God,  consisting  of  varioiis  numbers  of 
letters.  But  Mr.  Serle,  on  the  authority  ofGalatinus, 
a  Christian  writer,  represents  these  twelve  letters  as  ex- 
pressing the  names  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit.  I 
therefore  make  a  few  remarks  on  this  head.  1st,  Mr. 
Searle  himself  expresses  his  doubts  respecting  the   source 

*The  copy  which  is  now  in  my  hands  was  printed  in  London,  by 
Thomas  Roycroft,  in  the  year  1656.  It  contains,  besides  the  targum 
of  Jonathan,  the  original  Hebrew  text,  together  with  the  Septuagint. 
Syriac,  and  Arabic  translations,  each  accompanied  with  a  Latin  inteT~ 
pretation. 


> 


V. 


■WJ 


J12 

fron  Raymundus  •^'-"»  "       f-^f '  ,„„formable  to    U.c 
this  sentence  of  twelve    letters,   '^    «°  y^i^ew 

European  style  of  writing,  bnt  .s  ^  fo  e  g" 
idio.,  which    re,u-.res  a  co.,u  c         before  .   ,^^^  ^^^^^ 
but  the  om.3s.on  of  th.s    sl.o«s  _ 

•-vented  by  one  ---;-;■:  .Hetre^  3rd.y,  Mai- 
pean  languages,  .^^an  °  J^  ^  '  „f  „,  gerle,  owns  that 
tnonides,  the   or.gmal   »""  °"'y  „f  „^her  names  ; 

,hese  -|-  't  inU-Te  anr„  of  them  rep.esents 
whereas  Mr.  «-      "    ''  ;^  ^,,,,  Uuee  complete  names, 

r.ersr:rH:.;^^u,  instead  of  givi.^^ 

for  each  of  the  twelve  letters.  j  illustrations 

1  am  not  aware  how  ^^VZeZ^U..  already  dis- 
of  similar    weight   and  .mpo Uance  ^^ 

cussed   may  st.ll  rema.n,  tha   have  n  „j. 

.„y  notice;  but  I  trust  «  «  -;->  -/^the  unity  of 
ciently  far  to  just.fy  me  ..^  '""  »;'  "^  ^  ,,,  ^„d  in  the 
God   as  the  doctrine  taught  al.ke  .n  the  OUl 

^7  "'"Tclud;  this  Appendix,  with  repeating  my  pray- 
tCa  dayt        otTrrive,  when  religion  shall  not  be 
er,  that  a  day  ni*^  =  ,  j  ^i,en 

^f  i^-.fipreiice  between  man   and  man,   aim 

Guide  to  Peace  and  Happiness. 


>.1 


313 


1\  S.  Dr.  I'rideaux,  in  tlie  tuurtli  volume  of  his  **  Con- 
nexion," (which  has'very  lately  come  into  my  hands,) 
takes  a  diiTerent  view  of  Isaiah,  ch.  ix.  vers.  0,  7,  from 
tliat  which  has  been  offered  in  the  preceding  pages.  After 
quoting  the  words  of  the  prophet  according  to  the  English 
Version,  he  says,  *'  Christians  all  hold  that  this  is  spoken 
of  the  Messiah  ;  and  Jonathan,  in  the  Targum  which  is 
truly  his,  doth  on  that  place  say  the  same."  Hereby  he 
gives  out  that  this  prophecy,  including;  the  epithets 
"  Wonderful,  Counsellor,  the  Mighty  God,  the  Everlasting 
Father,  and  the  Prince  of  Peace,"  is^applied  by  Jonathan, 
as  by  Christians,  to  the  Messiah  : — I  therefore  give  here 
the  explanation  given  by  Jonathan  to  verses  6  and  7, 
which  will  sufficiently  show  the  error  Dr.  Prideaux  has 
committed. 

xjS  a^rrnx  i3   wS    n^S^nx  '3*i    nx    nn   .t3S   i^^a^   "idk 
mv;?  N^SiDn   anp  jo   h^dk^   npnxi  niddS  'T))h};   Nnnix  S^3pi 
:  ^niDV^   mhy   'ID'   ndSb/t  t<T}'WD    n^dSjtS    o^p  Ni3i  nhSx 

"  The  prophet  says,  to  the  house  of  David  a  child  is 
born,  to  us  a  son  is  given,  and  he  will  take  upon  himself 
the  preservation  of  the  law ;  from  the  presence  of  the 
causer  of  wonderful  counsels,  the  great  God  enduring  for 
ever,  his  name  will  be  called  the  anointed,  (in  Heb.  Mes- 
siah,) in  whose  days  peace  shall  be  multiplied  upon  us." 
"  Greatness  shall  be  multiplied  to  those  who  obey  the  law, 
and  ^to  those  who  keep  peace,  there  will  be  no  end  to 
the  throne  of  David  and  of  his  government  :  for  establish- 
ing and  for  building  it  with  judgment  and  with  justice  now 
and  for  ever." 

43 


; 


i  hi 


314 

Here    Jonathan,   in'  direct    opposition    to    Christians, 
denies  to  the  Son  so  born,  the  epithets  "  Wonderful,  Coun- 
sellor, Mighty  God,  and  Everlasting  Father  ;'  and  applies 
to  him  only'the  title,  of  ^^  the  Prince  of  Pe-,"    -^^^ 
synonymous    with  Messiah,)  on  account  of  Ins  preervu  g 
pLe'during  his  reign,  as  was  promised  of  the  Mes.ah^ 
(2  Kings  XX.  19,  ^'  Is  it  not  good  (says  Hezek.ah)  .f  peac 
Ld  tru'th  be   in  my  days?"     2  Chron.  -"'f^;  ,    f^ 
wrath    of  the    Lord  came   not  upon    them  n.  the  days  o 
Hezekiah.")     Tliis  application   of  the  term  anomted   (oi 
Messiah)  is  made  to  Hezekiah  in  the   --^-^--;^  ^^  J? 
other  eminent  kings,   often  called  Messiah    -  ^he   Sacred 
Writings  :-l  Samuel  xxii.  3,  ^'  Behold  here  I  am !  wUn  ss 
against  me  before   the   Lord,    and   his  anointed,   (or  his 
Messiah,)  the  king."     2  Samuel  xxiii.  1,  "  David  the   son 
of  Jesse  snid,  and  the  man  who  was  raised  up  on  higli,  the 
Messiah  of  the  God  of  Jacob,"  kc.     Ch.  xxii.  51       He  is 
the  tower  of  salvation    for  his  King,  and  showeth  mercy 
to  his  Messiah,  unto  David,  and  to  his  seed  for  evermore 
1  Samuel  ii.   10,  "  The  Lord   shall  judge  the  ends  of  the 
earth  ;  and   he   shall    give   strength  unto   his  King     and 
alt    he   horn    of    his  Messiah "     ^----^17 
know   1  that  the  Lord  saveth  his  Messiah."     Isaiah  xlv^l, 
«  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  his  Messiah,  to  Cyrus.       The 
reign    of  Hezekiah     was  so   accompanied  wuh   peace  and 
success,   that  some  Jewish  commentators   entertained   the 
opinion  that    Hezekiah  was  really  the  last  Messiah  pro- 

cc  There  is     no  Messiah    for  the    Israelites,    for  they 
enjoyed  it  (i.  e.  they  had  him)  at  the  time  of  Hexekiah. 


315 

If  Trinitarians  still  insist,  in  defiance  of  the  above 
authorities,  and  under  pretence  of  the  word  "  anointed"  or 
"Messiah,"  found  in  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  that  his 
interpretation  should  be  understood  of  the  expected  Mes- 
siah, then  as  far  as  depends  upon  the  interpretation  given 
by  him  of  verses  6  and  7,  they  must  be  compelled  to 
relinquish  the  idea  that  he  expected  a  divine  deliverer. 
Moreover,  all  other  celebrated  Jewish  writers,  some  of 
whom  are  more  ancient  than  Jonathan,  apply  the  passage 
in  question  to  Hezekiah,  some  of  them  differing  however 
from  him  in  the   application   of  the  epithets  contained  in 

verse  6. 

Talmud  Sanhedrim,  ch.    11,    "  God  said,  let  Hezekiah, 

who  has  five  names,  take  vengeance  upon  the  king  of 
Assyria,  who  has  taken  upon  himself  five  names  also." 
R.  Sholomo  follows  the  annotation  made  by  Shammai. 
"  For  a  child  is  born,  he.  Though  Aliaz  was  wicked,  his 
son,  who  was  born  to  him  to  be  a  kinu  in  his  stead,  shall 
be  righteous,  the  government  of  God  and  his  yoke  shall 
be  on  his  shoulder,  because  he  shall  obey  the  law  and  keep 
the  commandments  thereof,  and  shall  incline  his  shoulder 
to  the  burden  of  God. — And  he  calls  his  name,  &c.  God, 
who  is  the  wonderful  counsellor,  and  the  mighty  and  ever- 
lasting Father,  called  his  name  the  Prince  of  Peace,  for 
peace  and  truth  shall  be  in  his  days."* 

*  It  is  worth  noticing,  that  "  to  be  called"  and  "  to  be"  do  not 
invariably  signify  the  same  tiling;  since  tlie  former  does  not  always 
imply  that  the  thing  is  in  reality  what  it  is  called,  but  the  use  of  it  is 
justified  when  the  thing  is  merely  taken  notice  oj  in  that  view.  Sec 
Lukei.  36,  "This  is  the  sixth  month  with  her  who  was  called  (that 
is  reputed)  barren."  Isaiah  Ixi.  3.  "That  they  might  be  called  (oi 
accounted)  trees  of  righteousness."    This  is  more  especially  the  case 


tl 


I 


y{ 


I 


i 


L 


^. 


) 


I 


316 

The  reader  will  not  suppose  the  application  of  tl.c  terms 
"  wonderful  counsellor,   mighty   God,   everlasting  Father, 
and   prince   of  peace,"    to    Hezekiah,  to  be  unscriptural, 
when  he  refers  to  page  283  of  this  work,  and  considers 
the  following    passages,  in    which   the   same  epithets  are 
used  for   human  beings,   and  even  for  inanimate  objects. 
2  Chron    ii.  9,  "The  house  uhich  I  am  about  to  build  shall 
be    wonderful    great.'^     Micah    iv.  1),   ^' Is    there  no    king 
in    Ihee?   Is    thv   counsellor    perished?"  Genesis    x.n.   6, 
"  Hear   us  :     thou   art   a    Might)    Prince     amongst    us 
Judges  ix.  IS,   -  Should  1  leave  my   wine  which  cheereth 
God  and    man?"   that   is,   master   and    servant.     2  Thess. 
ii   4    "  Who  opposeth  and  eKalteth  himself  above  all  that 
•m' called  God.''       Gen.  xlix.  26,    "To  the  utmost  bo.md 
of  the   everlasting  hills."       I  Samuel   iv.  8,   "  Who  shall 
deliver  us  out  of  the  hands  of  these  mighty  gods  r"  which 
Cruden  interprets  of  the  Jewish  ark.     Isaiah  xii.  11—28, 
[xliii.  28,]  "  Therefore  I  have  profaned  the  princes  of  the 

sanctuary." 

I  wonder  how  those  who  found  their  opinion  respectuig 
the  Trinity  on  terms  applied  in  common  to  God  and  crea- 
tures, can  possibly  overlook  the  plain  meaning  of  the  term 
'«  Son  "  or  "  Only-begotten,"  continually  applied  to  the 
Saviour  throughout  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament ;  for 
should  we  understand  the  term  God,  in  its  strict  sense, 
as  denoting  tl»e  First  Cause,  (that  is,  a  being  not  born  nor 
begotten,)  we  must  necessarily  confess  that  the  idea  ol 
God  is  as  incompatible  with  the  idea  of  the  "  Son,"   or 

when  the  phrase  "  to  be  called"  has  for  its  subject  not  a  person,  but 
the  name  of  a    person.       See    Deut.     xxv.   10,    "And    his  name 
shall  be  called  in  Israel,  the  house  of  him  that  hath  his  shoe  loosed. 
Genesis  xlviii.  16,  "Let  my  name  be  named  on  them." 


317 


'*  Only  begotten,"  as  entity  is  with  non-entity ;  and  there- 
fore that  to  apply  both  terms  to  the  same  being  will 
amount  to  the  grossest  solecism  in  language. 

As  to  their  assertion,  that  there  are  found  in  the  Scrip- 
tures two  sets  of  terms  and  phrases,  one  declaring  the 
humanity  of  Jesus  and  another  his  deity,  and  that  he  must 
therefore  be  acknowledged  to  have  possessed  a  twofold 
nature,  human  and  divine,  1  h  ive  fully  noticed  it  in  pp. 
167 — 169,  252,  253,  pointing  out  such  passages  as  contain 
two  sets  of  terms  and  phrases  applied  also  to  Moses  and 
even  to  the  chiefs  of  Israel  and  to  others ;  and  that,  if  it 
is  insisted  upon,  that  each  word  in  the  Sacred  Writings 
should  be  taken  in  its  strict  sense,  Moses  and  others, 
equally  with  the  Saviour,  must  be  considered  as  gods,  and 
the  religion  of  the  Jews  and  Christians  will  appear  as 
Polytheistical  as  that  of  Heathens. 

Although  there  is  the  strictest  consistency  between  all 
the  passages  in  the  sacred  books,  Trinitarians,  with  a  view 
to  support  their  opinion,  charge  them  first  with  inconsis- 
tency, and  then  attempt  to  reconcile  the  alleged  contradic- 
tion by  introducing  the  doctrine  of  the  union  of  two 
natures,  divine  and  human,  in  one  person,  forgetting  that 
at  the  same  time  the  greatest  incongruity  exists  between 
the  nature  of  God  and  man,  according  to  both  revelation 
and  common  sense. 

If  Christianity  inculcated  a  doctrine  which  represents 
God  as  consisting  of  three  persons,  and  appearing  some- 
times in  the  human  form,  at  other  times  in  a  bodily  shape 
like  a  dove,  no  Hindoo,  in  my  humble  opinion,  who 
searches  after  truth,  can  conscientiously  profess  it  in  pre- 
ference to  Hindooism  ;  for  that  which  renders  the  modern 
Hindoo  system  of  religion  absurd  and  detestable,  is,  that 
it  represents   the  divine  nature,  though  one,  as  consisting 


HI 


i^ 


{     \ 


...  J__aws£^:s& 


.1 


S\ii 


e  ™«nv  oersons  capable  of  assuming  different  forms  for 
1  d  sd-rrlo  different  offices.  1  am,  however,  most 
;ir  ::iced,  that  Chris.iani.y  is  entirely  .ee  from 
every  trace  of  Polytheism,   whether  gross  or  refined      I 

h  eVre  enjoy  the  approbation  of  ■"yconsc.ence.n  pub- 
lishing the  Precepts  of  this  religion  as  the  source  o.  Peace 
and  Happiness. 


THE  END. 


\ 


I 
/ 


It- 


FINAL  APPEAL 


TO 


I  IIJK  eilUISTIAIV  PUBLIC, 


IX    DEFE.NCE    OF    TUF. 


'PRKtKPTS  OP  JESUS.' 


11 


Br 


UAMiMOllUN    ROW 


BOSTOX: 

CHHisriA^  Register  Office S.  B.  Manning.  Printer 

1828. 


\ 


I 


> 


> 


PREFACE. 

Notwitlistanding  the  apprehension  of  exciting   displeasure 
in  the  hreasts  of  many  worthy  men,  I   feel  myself  obliged  to 
lay  before  the   public  at  large  this  my  self-defence,  entitled 
*'  A    Final   Appeal   to   the    Christian  Public."     I    however 
<onfidently   hope  that   the    liberal   among  them  will  be  con- 
vinced,  by  a  reference   to  the  first  part  of  this  Essay  and  to 
iriy  two  former   Appeals,  that  the   necessity   of  self-vindica- 
tion  against   the  charge  of  being   an  "  injurer  of  the   cause 
of  truth,"  has   compelled    me,    as    a    warm    friend    of    that 
••anse,  to  bring  forward   my  reasons  for  opposing  the  opinions 
maintained   by   so    large   a   body    of  men    highly  celebrated 
for  learning  and  piety  ;  a  consideration  which,   I   trust,  will 
induce   them    to  regard  my  present  labors   with    an   eye    of 
indulgence. 

/  am  well  aware  that  this  difference  of  sentiment  has  al- 
ready occasioned  much  coolness  towards  me  in  the  demean- 
or of  some  whose  friendship  I  hold  very  deai  ;  and  that  this 
protracted  controversy  has  not  only  prevented  me  from  ren- 
dering my  humble  services  to  my  countrymen,  by  various 
publications,  which  I  had  projected  in  the  native  languages, 
but  has  diverted  my  attention  from  all  other  literary  pursuits 
for  three  years  past.  Notwithstanding  thcFc  sacrifices,  I 
feel  well  satisfied  with  my  present  engagements,  and  cannot 
wish  that  I  had  pursued  a  different  course  ;  since,  whatever 
may  be  the  opinion  of  the  world,  my  own  conscience  fully  ap- 
proves of  my  past  endeavors  to  defend  what  I  esteem  the 
cause  of  truth. 

Fn  my  present  vindication  of  the  unity  of  the  Deity,  as  re- 
vealed through  the  writings  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
I  appeal  not  only  to  those  who  sincerely  believe  in  the  Books 
vC  Revelation,  and  make  them  the  standard  of  their  faith  and 
f»ractice,  and  who  must  therefore  deeply  feel  the  great  impor- 


i?*i 


) 


tanoe  of  the  Divine  oracles  heing  truly  iiit<'r|)reted  ;  hut  I 
also  appeal  to  those  who,  ahhoujrh  uuliirerent  ahout  rehgiori, 
yet  devote  their  iniiuls  to  the  investigation  and  discovery  of 
truth,  and  who  will,  therefore,  not  think  it  unworthy  of  their 
attention  to  ascertain  what  are  the  genuine  doctrines  ot 
Christianity,  as  taught  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  how 
much  it  has  been  corrupted  by  the  subsequent  intermixture 
of  tho  polytheistical  ideas  that  were  lanuliar  to  its  Greek  and 
Roman  converts,  and  which  have  Continued  to  disfigure  it  in 
succeeding  ages.  I  extend  my  appeal  yet  further  ;  1  solicit 
the  patient  attention  of  such  individuals  as  are  rather  unfa- 
vorable to  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  as  generally  promul- 
gated, from  tinding  them  at  variaM<e  with  common  sense, — 
that  they  may  examine  and  judge  whether  its  doctrines  are 
really  such  as  they  are  understood  to  be  by  the  popular 
opinion,  which  now  prevails. 

I  feel  assured  that  if  religious  controversy  be  carried  on, 
with  that  temper  and  language  which  are  considered,  by  wise 
and  pious  men,  as  most  consistent  with  the  solemn  and  sacred 
nature  of  religion,  and  more  especially  with  the  mild  spirit  of 
Christianity,  the  truths  of  it  cannot,  for  any  length  of  tinie^  be 
kept  concealed,  under  the  imposing  veil  of  high-sounding  ex- 
pressions, calculated  to  astonish  the  imagination  and  rouse 
the  passions  of  the  peoj)le,  and  thereby  keep  alive  and 
strengthen  the  preconceived  notions,  with  which  such  lan- 
guage has  in  their  minds  been,  from  iiilancy,  associated. 
But  1  regret  that  the  method  which  has  hitherto  been  observ- 
ed in  in(juiry  after  religious  truth,  by  means  ot  large  publi- 
cations, necessarily  i.snued  at  consuhTahIc  intervals  of  time, 
is  not,  for  several  reasons,  so  well  adapted  to  the  speedv 
attainment  of  the  proposed  object,  as  I,  and  other  friends  of 
true  religion,  could  wish.      These  reasons  arc  as  follows  : — 

1st.  Maiij' leaders  ha*Y?  nf>t  suthcient  leisure  or  perseve- 
rance to  go  through  a  voluminou.^  essay,  that  they  may  make 
up  their  minds  an<l  come  to  a  settled  oftinion  on  the  su'oject. 

^dly.  Those  who  have  time  at  their  command,  and  inti^r- 
est  themselves  in  religious  researches,  tinding  the  real  point 
under    di.scu.ssion    mixed    up   with    mjurious   iiisinuati'«'^ts   and 


)f  Personalities,   soon  feel  di..oouraged    from  proceeding  further 

•  long  betore  they  can  come  to  a  determination. 

'iiWy.     The  multiplicity  of  argumems  and  various  interpre- 
tations of  numerous   scriptural   passages,    that   bear  often   no 
immediate  relation  to  the  subject  or  to  each  other,  introduced 
n,   succession,   distract    and    di.shearten    such    readers   as   are 
I  not  accustomed  to  Biblical  studies,  and  interrupt  their  further 

progress. 

As  Christianity  is  happily  not  a  subject  resting  on  vague 
metaphysical  speculations,  but  is  founded  upon  the  authority 
ot  books  written  in  languages,  which  are  understood  and  ex- 
plained according  to  known  and  standing  rules,  1  therefore 
propose,  with  a  view  to  the  more  speedy  and  certain  attain- 
ment ot  religious  truth,  to  establish  a  monthly  periodical  pub- 
lication, commencing  from  the  month  of  April  next,  to  be 
devoted  to  Biblical  criticism,  and  to  subject  Unitarian  as  well 
as  1  rmitarian  doctrines  to  the  test  of  fair  argument,  if  those 
<»1  the  latter  persuasion  will  consent  thus  to  submit  the  scrip- 
n.ral  grounds  on  which  their  tenets  concerning  the  Trinilv 
are  built.  -^ 

H-..r  ,l.o  sake  of  method  and  convenience,  1  propose  Iha., 
be„u.„,ng  w„l.  the  Hook  of  GenesU,  and  taking  all  the  pas- 
sages „.  that  portion  of  Scripture,  whuh  are  thought  to 
■  -ountenance  the  doctrine  of  the  Tr.n.ty,  we  should  examine 
>'"■■■'  one  l.y  one,  and  publish  our  observations  upon  the.n  • 
•.".I  that  next  n.onth  we  proceed  n.  the  same  manner  with  the' 
Hook  ot  Kxo.lns,  and  so  on  with  all  the  JJooks  of  the  Old 
■in<l  INew  Testaments,  in  their  regular  order 

'  .    l^irVrf,,  "'^'*''''^'""-^  (Gentlemen,  for  himself  and  „. 

l-ehalf  of  his  (ellow  laborers,   choose    to  prof,,  by  the  opportu 
n.tvtlius  atiorded   them,   of  defending  and  dillusiug  the  doc- 
■nues  they  have  un.lertaken  to  preach,  I  re.piest  Iha,  an  Ks- 
say  on  the  Book  of  (Jeuesis,  of  the  kind  above  intimated,  may 
be  sen,  me  by  the  middle  of  the  month,  and  if  conlined  within 
reasonable  hm.ts  not  exceeding  a  do/.en  or  sixteen   pages     I 
hereby  engage  to  cause  it  to  be  printed  and  circulated   ati'nv 
own  charge,  should  the  Missionary  Gentlemen  refuse  to  be 
<",sy  any  part  of  the  fnu.ls,  intended  for  the  spread  of  Chris- 


Y 


\ 


(> 


rianity,  towards  this  object;  and  also  that  a  reply  (not   e\ 
ceeding  the  same  number  of  pages)  to  the  arguments  adduc- 
ed, shall  be  published  along  with  it  by  the  beginning  of  th. 
ensuing  month.     That  this  new  mode  of  controversy,  by  short 
monthly  publications,  may  be  attended  with  all  the  advantage*; 
which  I,  in  common  with  other  searchers  after  truth,  expe«  t. 
and  of  which  it   is   capable,  it  will  be   absolutely  necessarv 
that  nothing  be  introduced  of  a  personal  nature,  or  calculated 
to  hurt  the  feelings  of  individuals — that  we  avoid  all  offensive 
expressions,  and  such  arguments  as  have  no  immediate  con- 
nexion with  the  subject,  and  can  only  serve  to  retard  the  pro- 
gress o€  discovery;  and  that  we  never  allow  ourselves,  for  a 
moment,  to  forget  that  we  are  engaged  in  a  solemn  religion 
disputation. 

As  religion  consists  in  a  code  of  duties  which  the  crcatur- 
believes  he  owes  to  his  Creator,  and  as  '^God  is  no  respecter 
of  persons,  but  in  every  nation  he  that  fears  him  and  woHs 
righteousness  is  accepted  with  him  ;"  it  inust  be  considered 
presumptuous  and  unjust  for  one  man  to  attempt  to  interfer*; 
with  the  religious  observances  of  others,  for  which,  he  well 
knows,  he  is  not  held  responsible  by  any  law  either  human  or 
divine.  Notwithstanding,  if  mankind  are  brought  into  exis- 
tence, and  by  nature  formed  to  enjoy  the  comforts  of  society 
and  the  pleasures  of  an  improved  mind,  they  may  be  justified 
in  opposing  any  system,  religious,  domestic,  or  political, 
which  is  inimical  to  the  happiness  of  society,  or  calculated  to 
debase  the  human  intellect  ;  bearing  always  in  mind  that 
we  are  children  of  ONE  Father,  "  who  is  above  all,  arnl 
through  a//,  and  in  us  o//." 

Calcutta,  January  "^O,    1823. 


FINAL  APP 


vyAij, 


CHAPTER  T 


ra 


liNTKODUCTORY     ReMARKS. 

Nearly  a   month  having  elapsed  after  the   pubh- 
tlon  of  the  fourth  number  of   the  quarterly  series 
of  the  "Friend  of  India,"  before  it  happened  to  reacli 
me,  and  other  avocations   and  objects  having  subse- 
(juently  engaged  my  attention,  1  have    not  till  lately 
had  leisure  to   examine    the    laborious   essay  on  the 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  Atonement,  at  the  con- 
( lusion  of  that  Magazine,  offered  in  refutation  of  mv 
Second  Appeal  to  the  Christian  Public.   For  the  able 
and  condensed  view   of  the  arguments  in  support  of 
those   doctrines,   which  that  publication   presents,  I 
liave  to  offer  the  Reviewer  my  best  thanks,  though 
file  benefit  I  have  derived  from  their  perusal  is  lim- 
ited to  a  corroboration  of  my  former  sentiments.     I 
must,  at  the  same  time,  beg  permission  to  notice  a 
few  unjust  insinuations   in  some    parts  of   his   essay  ; 
but  in  so   doing  1  trust  no  painful   emotions,   neither 
of  that  salutary   kind  alluded  to  by  the  Editor,  nor 
of  any  other,  will    make  their  appearance  in  my  re- 
iuarks. 


V 


) 


a 


The  Kev.  tAlltor  cliar^ffs  mo  with  the  arrogance 
of  taking    upon   in}self  -^  to  teach  doctrines  directly 
opposed  to  those  held  by  the  mass  of  real  Christians 
in  ever}  a«;e."     To  vindicate    myself  from  the   pre- 
sumption   with    which    1    am    here   chained,  and   to 
shew  by  what    necessity  I  have  been   driven  to   tin* 
publication  of  opinions  unacceptable  to  many  esteem- 
ed characters,  [  beg  to  call  the  attention  of  the  |)uh- 
lic  to  the  laiiffuaore  of  the  Introduction  to  the  ^'' Pre- 
<epts  of  Jesus,"  compiled  by  me,  and  which  was  my 
lirst  publication   connected  with  Christianity.      They 
may  observe  therein,  that,  so  far  from  teaching  any 
-opposite    doctrines,"  or  *' rejecting    the    prevailing 
opinion  held  by  the  great  body  of  (christians,"  I  took 
every  precaution  against   giving  the   least  oifence   to 
the  prejudices  of    any  one,  and  consetpiently  limited 
my    labor    to    what    I    supposed    best  calculated   for 
the    improvement  of    those  whose  received  o|)inioii- 
are  widely  ditl'erent    from  those  of  Christians.      M\ 
words  are — "  I  declme  entering  into    any  discussion- 
on  those    points,   (the   dogmas  of   Christianity,)   and 
confine  my  attention  at  present  to  the  task  of  laying 
before  my  fellow  creatures  the  words  of  Christ,  with 
a  translation  from  the  English  into  Sungscrit  and  the 
language  of  Bengal.      1  feel  persuaded  that,  by  sej»- 
aratinfffrom  the  other  matters  contained  in  the  JSew 
Testament  the  moral    precepts    found  in  that    book, 
these  will  be  likely  to  produce    the   desirable  ellects 
of  improving  the  hearts  and  minds  of   men  of  dilVer- 
ent  persuasions  and  degrees  of  understanding." — (In- 
troduction, page  23.)  The  Precepts  of  Jesus,  which  I 
was  desirous  of  teaching,  were  not,  I  ho|)ed,  "oppns- 


ed  to  the  doctrin(;b  helil  by  the  mass  of  real  Chribt- 
ians,"  nor  did  my  language  in  the  introduction  imj)!^ 
the  *' rejection  of  those  truths  which  the  great  body 
of  the  learned  and  pious  have  concurred  in  deeming 
fully  contaiiMjd  in  the  sacred  scrij>tures." 

Notwithstanding    all    this    |)recaution,  however,   I 
could    not    evade  the    reproach    and    censure  of  the 
Editor,  who  not  only  expressed,  in  th(i  "Friend  of  In- 
dia," IVo.  20,  his  extreme  disapprobation  of  the  com- 
pilation,   in  a    manner    calculated    more    to  provoke 
than    lead  to  senrch    after    truth,  but   also  indulged 
hims<^lf  in  callintr  i"c  ;»'»  injurei  of  the  cause  of  truth. 
Uisap pointed    as  1  wn^.  I   took    refuge  in  the    liberal 
protection  of  the  public,  by  ap|>ealing  to  them  against 
the  une\|)ected  attacks  of  the  Editor.      In  that  a|> 
|>eal  I  carefully  avoided  entering  into  any  discussion. 
as  to  the  doctrine  -  '-Id  up  as  the  funiiamental  prin- 
ciples of  Chri^.(iiUJity  by  the  Editor.      The  language 
of  mv  lirst  auiK'a!  i.  this:  *•  llinuble  as  he  (the  com- 
piler)  is,  he    has  th(  rcfore  adopted    those    measures 
which  he  thou^hl  mo.-t  judicious  to  spread  i]iii  truth 
in  an  acceptable  miuiiK'r;   but  I  am  sorry  to  observe, 
that  he  (the  compiha)   has  unfortunately  and  unex- 
pectedly met  witli  opposition  fror^i  those    whom  he 
con-idcred  the  last  p(!rsons  likely  to   op|)ose  him  on 
this  subject."    (Page  121.)  -  Whether  or  not  he  (the 
compiler)  has  erred  in  his  judgment,  that  point  must 
be    determined    by  those    who  will   candidly  jieruse 
and  consider  th(^  arguments  already  advanced  on  this 
subject,  bearing  in  mind  the  lesson  particularly  taught 
by  the  Saviour   himself,  of  adapting  Ins   instructions 
to    the    susceptibility    and    caj)acity   of  his    hearers, 

2 


^ 


10 

John  xvi.  12 — '  I    have  yot  man)  things  to  say  unto 
you,  hut  ye   cannot   hear  thcni  now.'"  (Page    122.) 
"What  henefit  or  peace  of  mind  can  we  bestow  upon 
a  Mussulman,  who  is  an  entire  stranger  to  the  Chris- 
tian world,  hy  communicating  to  hiu),  witliout  prepar- 
atory instruction,  all  the   peculiai    dogmas   of  Chrii-:- 
tianity?"  (Page  123.)  "  Tlie  compiler  obviously  hav- 
ing in  view  at  least    one  object   in  common  with   the 
Reviewer  and  Rditor,  that  of  procuring  respect  for 
the    precepts  of    Christ,    might  hiive  reasonably  ex- 
pected more  charity  from  professed    teachers  of  his 
doctrine.'^  (P.  lO.'i.)    In  reviewing  the  First  Appal, 
the  Reverend  Editor  full)  introduced    the  doctrines 
of  the  Godhead  of  Jesus  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  of 
the  Atonement,  as  the  only  foundation  of  Christiani- 
ty;   whereby  he    compelled    me,  as  a  professed   be- 
liever of  one  God,  to  deny,  for  the  fust  time  publicly, 
those  doctrines;  and  now  he   takes   occasion    to   ac- 
cuse me  of  presumjition  in  teaching  doctrines    which 
he  has  himself  compelled  me  to  avow. 

The  Editor  assigns,  as  a  reason  for  entering  on 
this  controversy,  that,  after  a  review  of  the  "  Pre- 
cepts of  Jesus,  and  the  First  Appeal,"  he  "  felt  some 
doubt  whether  their  author  fully  believed  the  Deity 
of  Christ,"  and,  corNcquently,  he  "  adduced  a  few  pas- 
sao-es  from  the  scriptures  to  confirm  this  doctrine." 
Ho  tlicn  adds,  that  tliis  Second  Appeal  to  the  Chris- 
tian nubhc  confirms  all  that  he  before  only  feared. 
(Page  1.)  I  could  have  scarcely  credited  this  as- 
sertion of  the  Reviewer's  imac(|iiainlancc  with  my 
religious  opinions,  if  the  alletration  had  come  from 
gny  other  (juartcr;  for  both  in  my  conversation  and 


11 

•  orrespondcnce  with  as  many  missionary  gentlemen, 
old  and  young,  as  I  have  had  the   honor  to  know,  I 
have   never   hesitated,  when  required,   to   offer  I'ny 
scntrtnents  candidly,  as  to  the  unscripturality  and  u.^ 
reasonubloness  of  the   doctrine  of  the  Trinity.     On 
one  occasion   particularly,  when  on   a  visit  to  one  of 
the  reverend    colleagues  of  the  Editor,    at  Soram- 
pore,  long    before    the  ti.ne  of  these  publications,  I 
discussed  the  subject    with  that  gentleman  at  his  in- 
Vitation;  ami  then  fully    manifested    my  disbelief  of 
this  doctnne,  taking  the  liberty  of  examining  succes- 
sively  all   the  arguments    he,  from  friemlly  motives 
urged  upon  me    in  support    of  it.     Notwithstanding 
these  circumstances,  I  am    inclined   to   believe,  from 
my  confidence  in   the  character  of  the   Editor,  that 
cither    those    Missionary   gentlemen  that    were  ac 
quaintcd  with    my  religious  sentiments  have  hapiKsn- 
cd  to  omit  the    mention  of  them  to  him,  or  he  has 
forgotten  what  they  had  communicated  on    this  sul>- 
jecl,  when  he  entered  on  the   review  of  my  publica- 
tioiis  f>ii  Christianity. 

In  page  r,0.3,  the  Editor  insinuates  that  vanity  had 
led  me  to  presume  that  "  freedom  from  the  power- 
ful elfects  of  early  religious  impressions"  has  enabled 
me  to  "discover  the  truths  of  scripture,  in  its  most 
important  doctrines,  more  fully  in  three  or  four  years, 
than  others  have  done  by  most  unremitting  study  in 
thirty  or  forty."  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  ap 
|)ears  to  mc  so  obviously  unscriptural,  that  1  am 
|)retty  sure,  from  my  own  experience  and  that  of 
others,  that  no  one,  pssessed  of  merely  common 
sense,  will  fail  to  find  its  unscripturalitv  after  a  me. 


.r' 


\ 


( 


12 


thodical  stuilv  of  the  Old  and  IVcw  Testaments,  un- 
less  prev  ioiisly  impressed  in  the  early  jiart  ol  his  life 
with  creeds  and  forms  of  sj)eech  prepanri<;  the  way 
to  that  doctrine.  No  pride,  therefore,  can  be  siifv 
posed  for  a  mi^mcnt  to  have  arisen  from  commonly 
attainable  success.  The  Editor  might  bo  fully  con- 
vinced of  this  fact,  were  he  to  en<;aixe  a  few  inde- 
|^)cndent  and  dilioent  natives  to  study  attentively, 
both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  in  (heir  orijiriual 
lanofuasres,  and  then  to  offer  their  sentiments  as  lo 
the  doctrine  of  tlie  'J'rinity  being  scriptural  or  a  mere 
human  invention. 

To  hold  up  to  ridicule  mv  suggestions  in  the  Sec- 
ond Ap|)eal,  to  study  first  the  books  of  tiie  Old  Tes- 
tament, unbiassed  by  ecclesiastic  opinions,  imbibed  in 
early  life,  and  then  to  study  the  New  Testament, 
the  reverend  Editor  states,  that  "could  it  be  relied 
on  indeed,"  my  compendious  method  "  would  <leserv  c 
notice,  with  a  view  to  Christian  education  ;  as,"'  on 
my  plan,  *•  the  most  certain  way  of  cnal)ling  any  one 
to  discover,  in  a  sutxjrior  manner,  the  truths  and  doc- 
trines of  Christianity,  is  to  leave  hini  till  the  a<;e  of 
thirty  or  forty,  without  any  relif(ious  impression." — 
(Page  503.)  I  do  not  in  the  least  wonder  at  his 
disapprobation  of  my  suggestion  ;  as  the  Etiitor,  in 
common  witli  other  professors  of  traditional  opin- 
ions, is  sure  of  supporters  of  his  favoi'ito  doctrine,  so 
long  as  it  is  inculcated  on  the  minds  of  youths,  and 
even  infants,  who,  being  once  thoroughly  im|)rcssed 
with  the  name  of  the  Trinity  in  Unitv,  and  Unify  in 
Trinity,  long  before  they  can  think  for  themselves, 
must  be  alwavs  inclined,  even  after  their  reason  has 


become  matured,  to  interpret  the  sacred  books,  e^ell 
tliose  texts  utiioh  are  evidently  inconsistent  with  this 
doctriri.-.  in  a    manner  favorable   to    their  prcposcos- 
=ed  opinion,   uhother    their   study  be  confi.mod   for 
three,  or  thiriv.  or  twice  thirty  years.      Could   llin- 
(looism  continue-  af.erti.e  present  generation,  or  bear 
iic  studious  examination  of  a  single   year,  if  the  be- 
iv,-f  of  their  idols  being  endued  with  animation,  were 
er,.v.f„)|,.  ,m,„.ossed  on   the   young  before   thev 
'■'<•  toy  ears  of  understanding  ? 
I.=  t  n.e  here  suggest,  (hat,  ?n  mv  humble  opinion. 
"->  ^-  •  l^  liberal  and  wise  parent  can  ever  take  adva.i- 
tage  ot  the  unsuspecting   an<l  confiding   credulity  of 
Ins  cinldren  to   impress   them  with  an^  implicit  belief 
m  any  set  of  abstruse   doctrines,  and  intolerance  of 
all   other  o|  inions,  the    truth   or  reasonableness  of 
which  they   are  incapable  of   estimating.     Still  less 
would  he   urge  by  threats  the  danger  of  present  and 
eternal  punishment,  for  withholding  a  blind  assent  to 
opinions    they  are   unable  to  comprehend.     Parents 
are  hound,  by  every  moral  tie,  to  give  their  children 
such  an  education  as  may  be  sulFicient  to  render  them 
capable  of  exercising  their  reason  as  rational  aiKl  so- 
cal  beings,  and  of  forming  tlu..-  opinion  on  religious 
points,    without  ill-will  towards  others,  from  a  Thor- 
ongh  investigation  of  the  scriptures,  and  of   (Ik.  evi- 
dence and  arguments  a.Idi.ce.l    by  teachers  of  ,l,7rer- 
ent     ,.ers„asions.     .Ju.lgments,  thus   forme.l.   have  a 

real  caim  to  rcsnect  fmm  (K^,,      i      i  ,     i 

i^s(H.i,i  iiom  ttiose  who  have  not  (he 

means  of  judging  for  themselves.     But  of  what  con- 

sc.,uence  ,s  ,t,  in  a  question  of  (ruth  or  error,  to  know 

,  how  the  n.atter  at   issue  has  been  eonsi.lered,  even 


H 


14 

lor  u  huiidicd  generations,  by  those  who  have  bhntl- 
\y  adopted  the  creed  of  their  fathers  ?     Surely  the 
unbiassed   judgment  of  a  [jerson    who  has  proceeded 
to  the  study  of   the  Sacred  Scriptures,  with   an  anx- 
ious desire  to  discover  the  truth   they   contain,  even 
if  Ills  researches  were  to  be  continued   but  for  a  siiv- 
gle  twelvemonth,  ought,  as  far  as   authority  goes  in 
such  matters,  to  outweigh  the  o|)inions  of  any  num- 
ber who  have  either   not  thought  at  all   for  them- 
selves, or  have  studied  aft^r  prejuchcc    had  laid  hold 
of  their  minds.      What   fair  inquiry    respecting    the 
doctrine   of  the   Trinity  can   be  expected   from  one 
Avho  has  been,  on  the  bosom  of  his  mother,  constantly 
tauirht  to  ask  the   blessin<r  of  God  the   Father,  God 
the  Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  hear  the 
very  name  of  Unitarian  with  horror  ?     Have  the  doc- 
trines of  the  VY»dant  ever   succeeded  in  suppressing 
polytheism     amongst    the     generality    of    Hindoos, 
brought  up  with    the  notion  of  the  Godhead  of  the 
sun,  of  fire,  and   of  water,    and  of  the  separate   and 
independent  existence  of  the  allegorical  representa- 
tions of  the  attributes  of  God?     Were  the  sublime 
works,  written  by  the  learned  among  the  Greeks,  ev- 
er able  to  shako  the  early  acquired  superstitious  no- 
tions and  polytheistical  faith  of  the  generality  of  their 
countrymen  ?  ISay,  even  when  Christian  converts  be- 
came   numerous,  did  not  those  who   were   brought 
up  in  t\w  ancient  su()erstition  introduce  some  vestig- 
es of  their  idolatry  into  their  new  persuasion  ?     h\ 
fact,  nothing  can  more  surely  imjM^de  the    progrc>^ 
of  truth,  than  prejudice  instilled  into  minds  blank  to 
receive  impressions ;  and  the  more  unreasonable  arc 


I 


16 

.he  doctrines  of  a  religion,  the  greater  pains  are  tak- 
en by  the  supporters  of  them  to  plant  them  iu  the 
readily  susceptible  minds  of  youth. 

The  Editor  has  filled  a  complete  page  in  proving 
that,  besides   early  impressed  prejudices,    there  arc 
also  other  causes  of  error  in  judgment_an  attempt 
which  might  have  been  dispensed  with  ;  for  1  never 
ImiKed   the  sources  of  mistake  in  examining  rel.V- 
lous  matters  to  early  impression  alone.     1  attributed 
only  the  prevailing  errors  in  Christianity  to  tradition- 
al instructions   inculcated   in  childhood,  as   the  lan- 
guage of  my  Second  Appeal  will  shew.     «  Having  de- 
rived my  own  opinions  on   this  subject  entirely  from 
the  script..res  themselves,  I  may  perha,«  be  excused 
for  the  confidence    with    which    I    maintain    them 
against  those  of  so  great  a  majority,  who  appal  to 
the  same    authority  for    thcir's  ;    inasmuch  as  1  at- 
tribute their  diHbrcnt  views,  not  to  any  inferiority  of 
judgment  compared  with  my  own  limited  ability,  but 
<o  the   powerful    efibcls    of  early  religious    impres- 
sions ;  for  when  these  are  <leep,  reason  is  seldom  al- 
lowed Its  natural  scope   in   examining  them  to  the 
bottom."  [Pp.  .304-305.]     If  the  Editor  doubt  the 
accu^cy  of  this  remark,  he  might  soon  satisfy  him- 
self of  itr,  justice,  were  he  to  listen  to  the  suggestion 
olfered  ,n  the  preceding  paragraph,  with  a  view  to  as- 
•■ertain  whether  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinilv  rests  for 
|ls  belief  on  scriptural  authorities,  or  on  early  relig- 
ious impressions. 

The  Editor  mentions,  ironically,  (in  page  ;j,)  that 
•ny  success  in  scriptural  studies  was  such  '•  as  to  prove 
">at  the  most  learned  and  pious  in  every  age  of  the 


\, 


I 


> 


1^ 

churcli  have  been  so  (completely  mistaken  as  to  trans- 
for.n  the  pure  reli-ionof  Jesns  into  the  most  horrihlc 
i4h)!atrv/'      III  answer  to  this,  1  only  beir  to  ask   the 
Rev.  Editor  to  let  me  know  lirst  what  a  Protestant 
in  the  iifteenth  eentnry  eo.ild  have  answered,   if   'ne 
had  l)een  thus  questioned  by  a  Rojnan  Catholie:  "  Is 
your  success  in  examining  tlie  truths  of  scripture  such 
as  to  prove  that  th(^  most  learned  and  pious  in  every 
age  of  the  church  have  been  so  comphtely  mistaken 
a^  to  transform  the  pure    religion  of    Jesus  into  thc^ 
most  horrible  idolatry,  by  introducing  the  worship  of 
Mary  the  mother  of  Gml,  and    instituting   images  in 
churches,  as    well  as  by  acknowledging  the  pop<;  .i- 
the  head  of  the  church,  vested    with    the    power  ol 
forgiving  sinsf   Would  not  his  answer  be  this,  "  M\ 
success  Ts  indeed  so  as  to  prove  these  doctrines  to  he 
unscri|)tural.      As   to  your   inference's,   they    are   no 
more  divine  than  mine  ;  and  though    I  do  not  <louhi 
the  piety  and  h^arning  of   many  Christian^   of   your 
church  in  every  age,  I  am  persiinded  that  many  cor- 
ruptions, introduced  into  the  Christian  religion  by  the 
Roman  heathens  converted    in   the    fourth  and  111*11. 
centuries,  have  been   haiuh^d  down  through  succo- 
sive   generations    by  impn-^^ions    made  in    th^earl\ 
part  of  litV.  and  have   taken   such    root  in  the  mliM! 
of  men,  that  piety  and  learning    have  fallc^n  short  o\ 
eradicating  prejudices  nourished  by  church  and  stair, 
as  well  as  by  the  vulgar  supei>,titlon  and  enthubiasn.." 
Were  thl/reply  justifiable,  I  al.o   might   b<^  alloucul 
to  oflbr  the  following  answer:    '^  i  lind    not  the  <!n( 
trine  of   the    Trinity  in  tiic  scriptures;   I  cannot  r 
ceive  anv  human  creed    for  divine   truth:   biit,  witf 


17 


1 


out  chartr,,..,  tl.o  supporters  of  this  <loctrinc  with  im- 
piety or  Iraud,  hu„.l.ly  attribute  thc-ir  misintorpro fa- 
Man  of    the   Scriptures    to    .  early   reh^ious    in'pres- 

'I'ho  Editor  assigns  as  a  reason  for  l.is  omission  of 
several  ari,nin,en<s,  a.lduce.l    in    the   Second  Appeal 

Chaf"  wo   have  before  us  a   work  of  a  hundred  and 
seventy-three  pages,  to  an  exannnalion  of  which  we 

.  r"  ""■"  ^  :''""'*'  '""■  "'•''  ""•"''-•  ••  -<'  while  to 
leave  a   s,no|e   page    unnoticed,    n.ight   by   some   1k> 

deemed    e.pnvalen.    ,o    leaving    it  unaniored,  the 
ne..   ..anscr.p,.on  of   ,he    passages  to  be  answered 
wc  e   .t  .lone  „.  every  .nstance,  would  occu,,y  nearly 
a  Ihe  roon,  we  can  g.ve  the  reply  itself.     We  sha» 
<he  efore  a.lduee  su,  .  evi.lence  for  these  doctrines, 
as,  ,f  sound,  w.ll   render  every    thing  urged    against 
them  nugatory,  though  not  particularly  noticed.""    To 
enable  the  public  to  con.pare  the  extent  of  the  Sec- 
ond Appeal  w.lh  that  of  the   Review,  J  beg  ,„   „,^ 
serve,  that  the  former  contains  17.?  widely  printed  and 
tl.e  latter  .2«  closely  printed  pages,  and  'that  if  ^ 
one  will    take    the   trouble   of   comparing  the  num- 
ber of    words  per  page  in    the   (wo    Essays,  he    will 
soonsa..sfyhmvselftha,,heone    is    as    long   as  the 

"*•-'••      '»;'"=''-l<'w.rdsnotice,inthecour.:;of,he 
present  reply,  whether  or  not  -  the  eyulence  of  these' 

doctn„es,"ad<luce.lbytl.Edi,oruHlu=Rev,eJh 
still  left  a  great  many  an.„„,t,„(s  ;,,  ,i,.,  a  ,      . 

iinanswered.  ^  '^'''"'•'''  '1'"^^ 

J"  his   .aten.pt    to   prove    the  insudiciency  of  the 

precepts  of  .Jesus   ,o  procure  „.en  ,,eace  and  happi! 

"-••'-Hev.  Editor  a.lyance.Mh'e  following  ^ro^;. 


1 


s 


\ 


\ 


18 

tion,   "^  that  the   most  excellent  precepts,  the  most 
|)crfect  law,,  can  never  lead  to  happiness  and  peace, 
unless  by  causing  men  to  take  refuge  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  cross,"  (No.  1  Quarterly  Series  of  the  Frieikl 
of  India,  page  111,)  without  adducing  any  arguments 
having   reference    to     the     position.       I     therefore 
brought  to  his  recollection  (in  my  First  and   Second 
Appeals,)  such  authorities  of  the  gracious  author  of 
Christianity,  as  I  conceived  established  the  sufliciency 
of  these  precepts  for  leading  to  comfort,  and  solicit- 
ed the  Editor  "to  point  out,  in  order  to  establish  his 
position,  even  a  single  passage  pronounced  by  Jesus, 
enjoining  refuge  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross,  as  all-suf- 
ficient or  indispensable  for  salvation."  (F.  153  of  the 
Second  Appeal.)     The  Editor,  instead  of  endeavor- 
ing to  demonstrate  the  truth  of  his  assertion  as  to  the 
insufficiency  of  the  precepts  to  conduct  men  to  happi- 
ness, or  shewing  a  single  passage    of  the  nature  a|> 
plied  for,  introduces  a  great  number  of  other  passag- 
es of  Scripture,  which  he  thinks  well  calculated  to 
prove  that  the  death  of  Jesus  was  an  atonement  for 
the  sins  of  mankind.     I  regret  that  the  Editor  should 
liavc    adopted  such    an    irregular   mode  of   arguing 
in    solemn  religious     discussion;    and    I   still    more 
retrret  to  find  that  some  readers  should  overlook  the 
want  of  connexion  between   the    position   advanced 
and  the  authorities  adduced   by  the  FMitor.      Were 
wo  both  to  adopt  such  a  mode  of  controverey,  as  to 
cite   passages    apparently  favorable   to    our  respec- 
tive opinions  without  adhering  to  the  main  ground, 
the    number  of  his   Reviews,  and  of   my   Apfxjals, 
would  increase  at  least  in  proportion  to  the  number 


J9 

of  the  years  of  our  lives;  for  verses  and  quotations 
of  scripture,  if  unconnected  with  their  context,  and 
interpreted  without  regard  to  the  idiom  of  the  lan- 
guages in  which  they  were  written,  may,  as  expci> 
rnce  has  shewn,  be  adduced  to  support  any  doctrine 
whatever;  and  the  Editor  may  always  find  a  ma- 
jority of  readers  of  the  same  religious  sentiments 
with  liimself,  satisfied  with  any  thing  that  he  may 
o/Tbr,  either  in  behalf  of  the  Trinity  or  in  support  of 
the  Atonement. 

VVhether  Jesus  died  actually  as  a  sacrifice  for  the 
sins  of  men,  or  merely  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  duties 
of  his  office  as  the  Messiah,  as  it  was   predicted,  is 
merely  a  matter  of  opinion,   the  truth  of  which  can 
only   be  ascertained  from  a  diligent  examination  of 
the  terms  used  and  doctrines  set  forth   in  the  evan- 
gelical writings.     This  however  has  no  relation  to  a 
proof  or  disproof  of  the   sufficiency  of  his  precepts 
for  salvation.     In  order  to  come  to  a  conclusion,  as 
to  the  value  of  the  precepts  of  Jesus   being  either 
really  effi-ctual  or  merely  nominal,  I  deem  it  neces- 
sary to  repeat  a  few  passages  already  quoted  in  my 
Appeals,  to  ask  the    Editor,  whether  they  demand 
explicit  belief  or  are  unworthy  of  credit ;  and  in  case 
ho  admit  the  former  alternative,  I  should  beg  to  ask 
him,  whether  they  confirm  the  opinion  that  the  pre- 
cepts preached  by  Jesus  are   sufficient  to  lead  men 
to  eternal  peace  and  happiness,  or  are  a  set  of  sen- 
tences delivered  by  him  conformably  to  the  princi- 
pies  of  his  hearers,  similar  to  other  codes  of  moral 
law  written  by  the  ancient  philosophers   of  Greece, 


) 


r 


( 


20 


E<;ypt,  and  liiilia  ?     'VUv  jKis^agos  in  (juc.slion  are  an 

follow  : 

Mark  \li  29:    "Jc^^im  niisucnMl  Inni,    'V\u)  iirst  of 
all  the  coinniandnicnts  is,  Hear,  O  Israel,    tli<^    Lord 
onrCiodisonc    Lord.      Tlion    shall     lovr    ihc  Lord 
th)  Ciod  with    all    th)   heart,    and    with  all  thj  soul, 
and  with  all    th\   mind,    and    with    all    thy   strenj^th: 
this  is  the    (irst    eominandiiMnt.      And   i\\v   sfjcond  is 
like  unto  it,  namel),   Thnu  shall    love  thy    nei^hhoi 
as    thyself.      TluTe    is    iioik^    other    eoinrnandiiK^nt 
greater   than    these/'      Is    there    another  eoirnnand- 
nient  absohilely  enjoinin<r  r(jfii^<'   in    the   doctrine  of 
the  cross,  so  as  to   shew    that    these  two   command- 
ments  are  insulhcient  for  sahation,  and  comparative- 
ly insi<(nificant  ? 

Matthew w  vii.  21 :    "Tlu;refore,   whosoever    hear- 
eth  these  sayings  of  nnne,'' (alluding  to  the  precepts 
contained  inch.  v.  vi.  and  vii.)  "  and  doth  them,  I  will 
liken  him  unto  a  wise  man    who  built  his  house  upon 
a   rock,"   &c.      Are    not    these  sayings   declared    hy 
Jesus  to  alVord   a  stable    foundation,  on    which    niM^ 
be  raised  tlu'  ind<;structibl<^  c^dilice    of   etc^rnal    lii<' ? 
John   \v.  10:    ^'If   ye    keep    my  commandments  yc; 
shall  abide  in  my  love.''   V<  i.  II  :  "  Ye  are  my  fri(  nds 
if  ye  ilo  whatsoever  I  command   you.*'      I  thcnforc 
airain  ask  the  Rev.  Editor  to  shew   a  commandment 
of  Jesus  directinii:  refuiie  in  the  doctriiu;  of  the  cross, 
in  the  same  explicit  way  as  he  has  enjoined  love  toCind 
and  to   neighbors,   and  o])ediencc  to   his  precepts    i- 
suflicient  means  for  attaining  eternal  happiness.      Did 
not  Jesus  in  Matthew  xxv.  31,  et  scc|.  by  means  of  j» 
parable  in  the  description  of   the  day  of  Jud^nifint. 


\ 


21 

declare  that  acts  of  charity  and  beneficeiK  e  lovvard 
l('ll()W-creatur(!s  will  be  accepted  as  the  manifesta- 
tion of  love  towards  Goil,  and  be  tLe  suflicient  cause 
of  eternal  life  ? 

\V  ith  a  vi(nv  to  de|)reciate  the  weight  of  the  fol- 
lowing explicit  promise  of  J(;sus,  "Do  this,  and  thou 
.halt  live,"  the  Kditor  interpn^ts,  r  P.  500)  that  "  Je- 
sus taking  hiur  (thc'  lawyer)  '^on  his  own  principles, 
as  though  he  had  been,  what  he  vainly  imagined  hini- 
r^elf,  a  sinless  man  who  needed  no  Saviour,  directed 
him  to  t\i(i  whole  of  the  divine  law,  adding,  *  This  do, 
and  thou  shalt  live,'  though  In,'  knew  that  it  was  ut- 
terly impossible  for  thaf  lavvyer  to  observe  his  in- 
structions.'^  The  Ldifor,  however.  <|uite  forgot  that 
by  his  attempt  to  undervalue  the  precepts  of  Jesus, 
he  was  actually  degrading  the;  dignily  of  the  author 
of  them;  for,  according  to  his  inierpretaiion,  it  ap- 
pears that,  the  lavvyer  tempfed  Jesus  b\  putting  to 
liim  acjuestion  which  he  thought  tlie  Saviour  could 
not  answer;  so  Jesus,  in  retinn,  ^Mupli d  him  b> 
directing  him  to  do  wha(  \iv  knew  to  Ix,  impossible 
for  a  man  to  pc;rform.  though  this  very  teacher  for- 
bids others  to  shew  r<\('nge  even  to  enemies.  Did 
Jesus  take  also  the  scribe  ^^  upon  his  own  principles," 

by  instructing  him  in  these  two  counnandmenfs?* a 

man  who  was  never  inclined  to  tempt  Jesus,  but 
iiaving  heard  him  reasoning,  "  and  perceiving  that  he 
had  answered  w(dl,  asked  him  which  is  the  first  com- 
mandment of  all  rt  and  when  he  heard  the  reply  of 
Jesus,  he  said  "well,  master,  thou  hast  said  the 
truth,"— a  man  whom  Jesus  declared  to  be  at  least 

*  Mark  xii.  29.  f  Murk  xii.  28— .31 


I' 


V 


J 


■■%< 


si 


11 

out  of  (lanir#T  of  hell  for  his  ackiiowlrdij^nirnt   of  the 
(nitli  of  lus  prrcf'pts  as  llii'  iiu'ariH  of  salvation,  tcllin;; 
him  -  ilimi  art  not  far  fnriii  the  kinirdom  ofhvavrn  ?'' 
Dul  Jcisns  on  tlic  Mount  take  also  liis  dlsri|>lrs  '•  u|m)i. 
their  own  |»rin(:iplrr  as  thouirli  the)   had  Uvw,  what 
thty    vainly    iiua^nurd   thcniselvcs,  sinless    uu^n  who 
needed  no  Savi(»ur,  in  <lirerlini(  them  to  his  prerepts, 
the  ohservanre   of  which   he    knew  utterly  imjiossi- 
bhs  ami    in  lioldlnj;  out   promises*  of  eternal  salva- 
tion as  tin;  necessary  conseijuence  of  I  heir  obedience 
to  those  sayinirs  ?— Were  we  to  follow  the  mode  nf 
interpretation  ado|>(ed  in  this  instance^  hy  the  Ivlitor, 
the  Bible  wouhl  s*  rve  only  to  suit   our  convenic^ncc , 
ami  would  not  be*  esteemed  any  lonfircr  as  a  ^mde   U^ 
mankimi  ;  for,  according'  to  the;  sairie  mode  of   inter- 
pretation, would  it  not  be  justiliable  to  explain  Mal- 
Ihcw  xwiii.   I^N'^(j!o  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  na- 
tions, bapd/in-  them,"  iVc.  that  Jesus  <t>ok  his    apos- 
ties  "  npon  their  own  principle,"  as  firml)   persuaded 
to  believe  in  the  sanctilication  attainable  by  tlu^  \y,i\y 
tism  mtroduced  by  John  the  Ba|,list,allhou^rh  he  was 
aware  that  immersion  in  water  could  produce  no  f  f- 
fect  in  chan^nnj;  ihe  state  of  the  heart? 

In  reply  to  his  (juestion,  "  Did  J<sus,  who  knew  i\\v 
hearts  t>f  all,  rejrnn!  this  lawyer  as  |Kirfectly  sinlc^ss, 
an  exception  to  all  mankind  ?"  (Taj^e  9,)  I  fimst  saj 
that  the  context  seems  to  me  to  shew  that  neither 
Jesus  consi(h;r<id  the  lawyer  to  be  a  sinless,  |K;rfecl 
man,  (as  is  evident  from  his  direc  tin^^  him  to  tin 
scriptures  for  a  ^nidc;  to  salvation,)  "  Do  this  ami  thou 
shalt    live"    and  "(io  and   do   thou  likewise  v"   nei 

•  Matthew  vii.  21,  25. 


i3 

(lit!  the  lawyer  vainly  ima^rmo  lnms<;lf  "a  sinless  man 
who  needed  no  Saviour,"  thoiicrh  lie  endeavored  to 
put  the  claim  of  Jesus  to  that  title,  to  the  proof,  in 
{Uv.^o.  words,  "  Master  what  shall  I  do  to  inherit 
eternal  life?" 

AlthoiiiTJi  I  declared  in  the  Second  Appoal,  (Pa^o 
ir>())  that  by  the  term-l.iu,"  in  the  verse '^  If  ricrht- 
eoiisness  came  by  the  law,  Christ  is  dead  in  vain,"  all 
the  commandments  found  in  the  books  of  Moses  are 
understood,  yet    the    K(;v.    Kditor  charges   me  with 
afMinintelJiirible  expression,  ami   intimates  his  inabili- 
ty to  ascertain  whether  I  meant  by  "law"  the  ccre- 
nionial  or  the   moral    part  of  the   books  of  Moses, 
{\\  507.)      I    therefore   beg   to    explain     the    verse 
more  fully,    that  the  llev.    Kditor   may  have   an  o|)- 
portunity  of  commenting  u|)on  it  at  large.     St.  Paul, 
knowing  the    efficacy   of  the    perfection   introduced' 
hy   Jesus   into    the   law   given    by    Moseys,   declares, 
that,    had  the  system  of   the  Mosaical  L'uv  been  suf. 
iicicnt  to  produce    light  among  the   Jows   and  Gen- 
tiles,  without  beihg  perfected  by  Jesus,  this  attempt 
mad(^   by  Christ  to   perfect   it   would   ha;e   been   su- 
IHMlluoiis,  and   his    death,    which    was    the    conse- 
^\nvMvv.  of  his  candid  instructions,  would  have   been 
to  no  piirpos<». 

1^f»c  Editor  notices  trefjiiently  my  expression  of 
^»n;  negh^rt  of  duty  on  the  p.,rt  of  man  to  the  Cre- 
ator and  t(»  his  fellow-creatures;  nevertheless,  he 
J'll^  up  more  than  two  pages  in  proving  this  point, 
tie  has  not,  however,  attempted  to  counteract  the 
f<>»v<'  of  the  passages  I  cpjoted  in  both  of  my  A|>- 
[H'nls.    shciwing    that    th«    guilt     ocrasioned    by    the 


k' 


r. 


iV 


\ 


{ 


2t 

want  of  iinn  olKMluiucr  to   the    pn^copts   in  (incsi.on 
may    hv   panlonrd,    llnou-l»    rc|,cntanrc'    picsciilud 
by  the    author    of    thoM.    prec.^pts,   as   tho   suit  nnd 
only  ixincMly  tor  human  faihnr.      I  thi^rcfoir  l>r-  lu 
ask    the    Kditor  to   ^^ive   a    plain    rxplanatlon  of  tho 
followino   |,assa<res  selected   from    my   A|)|)eals,   thai 
the  reader  may  he   ahh.    to  jud-e,   whether   or   not 
repentance  can  procure   us   the  hlessinirs  of   pardoiK 
for  our  constant    omissions   in  the  discharjre   of  ihc 
duties,    laid  d(»wn   in   th(^    pn;cepts  of   Jesu>.      Lukt 
V.   :V2:  ^*  I    came   not  to  call    the  righteous,  hut   sin- 
ners to  repentanci  ."      Does  not  Jt^sus  declare  a  chief 
object  of   his   mission   to   be    tlu^   callini;    of    sinners 
to' repentance?     Luke  xxiv.    17:  -That   repentanrr 
and    n^mission  of    sins   should     be     preached,    in  hi^ 
name,  amono    all    nations/'      Did   ni>l   Jous,   by   thi> 
commandment    to   hi>  <lisciples,  declare    th('     remis- 
sion of    sins  as   an   immediate^   ami  necessary  coum- 
fpicnce  of    repentance?      In   J.iike    xiii.    :5 :     K\ce|)l 
yi)   repenU  ye   shall   all    likewise  jjerishr    the     indh- 
pensnbilit)    of    repentance    for    the    fori;iveness    ot 
sins   IS  explicitly  declared.       Is  not    also   tlu^   inercN 
of  God   illustrated   by  the;  (xample   of  a  father  f 
givinti;  the   transo;ressions  of  his  son   throui^h  his  sii 
cere  repeiitancc;   alone,  in  tlie  parable  of  the    prodi- 
gal son?  Thos<;  who   place   confuli-iu  <•  in  ihe  diviiK 
mission  of  Jesus,  or    even  in    his   venicity,   will   not 
hesitate,  I  trust,  for  a   moment,   to  admit  tlwit  Je^"^ 
has    directed    us  to  sincere   lepcMitance  as   the   oiiK 
means  of   procuring  pardon,  knowing  thc^  inability  <! 
men  to   give  entire   obedience    to  his  precepts  ;  and 
that  Jesus    would    have  rccommendc^d    thc^  law>er. 


I- 


*2:j 


uiiom  he  <lirected  to  riirhteoiisness,  to'jiave  re- 
courses to  repentance  «  had  he  gone  and  sincerely 
tltempted''  to  obey  his  prec(.pls,  "watching  his 
own  /leart  to  discern  those  constant  neglects  of  the 
duty  he  owed  to  i\w.  Oeafor  and  to  his  fellow- 
rrealures,''  and  then  applied  to  Jesus  for  the  re- 
medy of  his  diseerned  imperfections. 

I    find   abundant  passages   in   the   Old   Teslamcnt, 
also,   n^preseiiling   otlu'r  sources    than    sacrifices,  aJ 
sii/ricienl  means  of  procMiring  pardon  for  sin.      Psalm 
I,.  17:— "The  sacriliees  of  (iod  are  a  broken  spirit: 
a  broken  and  conlrile  heart,  ()  God,  thou   wilt   not 
tlespise.''      Kzekicl     xviii.    :i()  :—"  Repent   and    turn 
voiirselves  from  all  your   transgressions  ;  so   ini(|uity 
^liall  not  be  y(,ur  n,in.^'    Provc^rbs  xvi.  (i :_"  ]>,y  mer- 
ry  and  truth  ini(|uity  is  purged,  and   by   the   fear  of 
the  Lord  men    depart    from    evil.''      Laiali  i.  J«:_ 
^' Gome   now   and   let   us   reason   together,  saith   the 
^onl.      i;hough  your  sins    bo   as   scarlet,   they   shall, 
'"•    -'s    white    as    snow;   though    Hiey    be    ltd    like 
erimson,    they  shall    be  as  wool." 

To   shew  the  ineriicacy  of  rcspentance   to  procure 
pardon,  the  Ldifor  appeals  to  human  justice,   which, 
as  he  says,  "  in(|„ires    not   about    the 'repentance    of 
;'»^^    robber  and    murderer,    but   respecting  his  gmlt. 
Ihe     law,   indeed,    knows    no    repentance.''— (Page 
•'>0(i.)      I  therefore  wish  to  know  whether  or  not  liii- 
•"•»n  j'istice   su/fers  an  innocent    man   to  be  killed,  to 
^'<'>Me  for  th<'  gnill  of  the  H  or  murder  committed  by 
''"•><l»er  .^     It  is,  at  all    events,    more   consistent  with 
I'i-lice,  that  a    juelge  who  has  the  privilege  of  shew- 
"ig  mercy,  should    forgivp  the    rriiims  of    tho.e  thnt 


»  ? 


2«i 


truly  fiicl  thr  paiii  JUid  distress  (»f  mind  insrparahir 
from  sinreri'  n'|KMitaii(<N  than  that  he  sh(»iild  put 
an  innorrni  man  to  drath,  or  tirstroy  his  own  hfe, 
to  atono  lur  the  guih  ol  sonut  of  Ins  rondrnuud 
culprits. 


iiKjiari/  into  the    Dnrtrine  if  the   jUoimmnl, 

In  his  first  Urvicw,  thr  Kditor  lK><.^an  with  what 
\\v,  considcn-d  ^MIh-  most  al)s(nis<',  and  \i\  the;  most 
important  (.f  Christian  dtxtrinc^s,  tho  Dt^it)  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  and  tluii  prorrrdcd  to  suhstantiatr  the  dor- 
triiK!  of  his  atonrmrnt.  I  thrrrfore  followed  tin- 
eoursr'  of  arran;;einent  in  m)  Second  A|)p<'al  ;  hut 
as  the  Hditor  has  introduced  the;  doctrine  ol  the 
atonement  of  Jesus  first  in  the  prese^nt  Keview,  I 
will  also  arrange  my  reply  accordin«;ly. 

The  Kditor    (juotes  lirst,  (ienesis   iii.   ITi  :— -  I  will 
put    enmhy  hetween  thee    and    the  woman,   and  Im 
tween    thy  seed   and    her   seed;   it  shall    hruise    thx 
head,  and    thou   shall    hruise    his  heed."      Trom  tin- 
passaj^e    he    attempts    to   deduce    the;    atonement    of 
Jesus  for  the  sins  of   men,    dc^mandiii";,  ''  What  could 
a  reptile    feel,    relative    to   the  fate  of    its   olrspnn:,^ 
through    future   at^es  ?  of  what    individual    ser|>ent 
did  the  seed  of  the  woman  lueak  the  head, so  as  fm 
It    to    hruise    his    heel  f'—"  Jesus,  then,"    he  aHirm-. 
*' is  the  seed  of    the  woman    who  sulVered    from  tin 
malice  of  Satan,   while   lie,  on    the   cross,  destroyed 
his    power   In    atomni;   for  sin   and   reconcilini^   m;<ii 


::/ 


,o  (;o(I.''— (Pajro  :,I7.)    I  a«hmt  that  a  reptde,  as  fat 
as    human    «X|)eriefice  iro«;s,   is  incapahle    of    tVelino 
•relative  to  the  late  of  its   oirsprini;    through    future 
;iires  r   hill   I  wish  to  know  if  a   men'   reptile  could 
not    have    the;    jMiwer  of  conversation,   so   as    to    per- 
suade a  woman    to  adhere    to    its   advice;  ;    whether 
the'  ass  of  I5alaaui  could  Ix;   possessed    of   tiu;    |)ovver 
of  se'eifiir  exe-.lusivel>    the'  an-el   of  (iod,  and  eonve  rs- 
iii^r    vvith    its   own    maste^r    Balaam  ?     and     wh<;tlu;r 
ravewis  could   dilinr,.,itly   supply    the    wants   of   Klijah, 
l»y  hriiiKiiii;  him  hread  and   llesli    morninir  and   e've;n- 
in;,^?      Are'  not  the'se  oceMirrence-s  e«piall>   dillicidt   to 
reeoncile  to   ^M-omiiion  se^nse;"  as  the'  case;  of  the  ser- 
pent    is,    ae-corelini;    to    the    r:ditor  ?      Yet    we'    (incJ 
Hie'se  stated  in  the  saere'd  hooks,  anel  we-  are;    taijoht 
<o    lM'li<;ve    the'Mi  as    they  staml.      Can    we;  justlv    at- 
teni|)t  to  re'pr<'se;nt  the  ass,  and  those  ravens  also,  as 
e'ithe;r  ani^^e'lie-al    or   demoniacal   spirits,   in    the;    same 
uay   as  the-  reptile  is  re'prese;nted    hy  the    Kditor   to 
have;  he'e'ii  no  other  than  Satan?     We  miirjit,  in  that 
case,   he    permitte«d  to  oiv<     ^till   irreate'r   latitude  to 
metaphor,  so  as   to    take'  all    the'  facts   found    in   the 
Bil)l(;     as     merely     alle'<r«)ncal     re'jHesentations  ;     hut 
would    not    the'   conse'jjiie'nce;   of  such    inte;rj)re'tations 
he  most   elanireroiis    to    the    cause'    of    truth  ?      'Vhv. 

^'|■se     111    ejuestion,     with     its   eorile'xt,   thus   runs: 

'*  And  the'  Lorel  (iod  said  unto  the  se'r|)e'nt,  l>e;e'aiise 
tlioii  hast  eione  this,  thou  art  eurse-d  ahove;*  all  cat- 
de  and  ahove  every  heast  of  the;  jield  ;  upon  thy 
'»''lly  shalt  thou  oro,  ;umI  diist  slialt  thou  eat  all  the 
•'Jiy^ofthy    life.      And    i    will    put    e-nmity    hetweMii 

^DD  <''>'"P"'"''l  of  Iwn  words.  TQ  ;in.J  S^  i.   v.  out  of  all 


{« 


li 


I   I 


J 


•2ii 


ihcf  ami  tlif  woman,  ami  between  tiiy  seed  and  lin 
seed  ;  it  shall  l.ruisc  thy  head  an.l  llioii  slialt  l.niisp 
his  heel."      Do  not   the   phrases,  «  Thou  ar«   cursed 
above  all  catlle,"'  and  "  above  every  beast  of  the  field," 
shew  clearly  that   the  serpent  thus  addressed    was 
really  no  spirit  in  borrowed  from,  but  the  animal  so 
denominated?     Does  noi   the  circumstance    of    the 
serpent  being  condenuied  to  inov(!  upon  its  belly,  and 
to  cat  dust   all  the  days  of   its  life,  evidently   imply 
that  the  ser|)ent  thus  cursed  was  of  the  same  class 
that  we  now  sec  subiecl  to  that  very  malediction   to 
the  present  day  ?     The  sins  of  fatlurs  arc  declared 
in  the  scriptures  to   have   been   visited    by   God   on 
their   posterity  -,  would   it   not   be,   therefore,   mor,. 
consistent  with  scriptural  authorities  to  attribute  the 
misery  of  serpents  to  the   heinous  conduct  of  then- 
first  origin,  than  to  Satan,  of  whom  no  mention  .< 
made  throughout  the  chapter  in  (juestion? 

But,  in  fact,  has  the  power  of  Satan  ov<-r  the  seed 
of  the  woman  been  destroyed  ?     The  onseciuenc- 
of  the  sin  which  our  first  parents  committed  by  th. 
ill  advice  of  the  reptile,   and   which    they  implanted 
in   the   nature   of  their    posterity,    have    been,    thai 
women  bring  forth  children  in  sorrow,  and  arc  ruled 
by  their  husbands,  and  that   the  earth   brings  forth 
thorns  also  and  thistles  to  men,  who  eat  the  herb  of 
the  field    with  labor,   and   return  at  last  to  dust.— 
(-Genesis  lii.  16—19.)      If  .lesus   actually  atoned  for 
sin,  and  delivered   men  from   its  consequences,  how 
can  those  men  and  women,  who  believe  in  his  atom- 
ment,  be  still,  equally  with  others,  liable   to  the  evil 
effects  of  th(^  sins  already  remitted  by    the  vicanon- 
sacrifice  of  .lesus  ? 


2i> 

If.  notwitlistaiiding  all  the  al)ovo-statcd  facts  and 
iirguments,  the  Kditor  still  insists  that  Satan  should 
lie  understood  by  the  re|)tile  mentioned  in  the  verse. 
:iiid  Jesus  by  the  seed  of  the  woman,  vet  his  inter- 
pretation  cannot  apply  in  the  least  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  atonement.  Jt  would  imply  only,  that,  as 
Satan  opposed  the  power  of  Jesus  to  procure  salva- 
tion for  all  men,  as  he  intended,  so  Jesus  diminished 
his  power,  and  disappointed  him  by  leading  many  to 
salvation  through  his  divine  precepts.  1  know  not 
how  to  answer  the  question  of  the  Editor,  "Of  what 
individual  serpent  did  the  seed  of  the  woman  hrcak 
the  head,  so  as  for  it  to  bruise  his  heel  ?"  unless  bv 
rrferring  him  to  the  reciprocal  injuries  which  man 
nnd  serpents  inflict  on  each  other. 

The  Editor  refers  to  the  circimistance  of  the  sac- 
Mlice  ollered  by  Abel,  and  approved  of  God  in  refer- 
ence to  his  brother  Cain's,  (Gen.  iv.  4,)  esteeming  it 
as  an  illustration  of  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Jesus  for 
the  remission  of  sin. — (Page  518.)  But  I  am  unable 
to  fmd  out  what  relation  there  could  exist  between 
tlic  acceptance  of  the  offering  of  Abel  by  Jehovah, 
vhkI  the  death  of  Jesus,  whether  sacrificial  or  not. — 
riic  Editor,  however,  founds  his  assertion,  that  Abel 
having  looked  forward  to  the  atonement  of  Jesus, 
liis  offerings  were  accepted  by  God,  upon  the  cir- 
^'imstancc  of  Abraham's  seeing  the  day  of  Christ  by 
[Hophetic  anticipation,  (John  viii.  56,)  and  of  Moses 
having  esteemed  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater 
liches  than  the    treasures  in    Egypt,  (lleb.  xi.  26,*) 

•  (Improved  Version  of  the  New-Testament,)  (h.  "  the  reproach  of  Christ," 
or,  "of  the  anointed."  The  IsraeliteH  »re  called  Christ's,  or  anointed,  i.  e. 
♦  <hoson  and  favored  people.  f'*ialm  cv.  J 5,  lleb.  iii.  13.     "  The  meaning  is." 


i^ 


they  all  Jiaving  been  '-of  the  same  catalogue."  |, 
therefore,  should  hope  to  he  infoinied  whether  there 
be  any  authority  justifyiuo;  ijiis  inference.  On  the 
contrary,  we  tlnd  the  fourth  ver^^e  of  the  same  cfiap- 
ter  of  Genesis  points  oiit,  thai  Abel,  havin<r  been  ac- 
customed to  do  well,  in  obedience  to  the  will  of  God, 
contrary  to  the  practice  of  his  brother,  ri«rhteous 
Jehovah  accepted  his  oiTcrinnr,  and  rejecfed  that  of 
Cain;  to  which  Paul  thus  alludes, — "By  faith  Abel 
offered  a  more  excellent  sacrifice  than  Cain,''  (He- 
brew xi.  4,)  without  leavin<r  us  doubtful  as  to  the 
sense  in  which  that  aposde  used  the  word  "faitir  in 
the  above  verse. 

"  By  faith  Abel  ofiercd  unto  God/'  kc,  "By  faith 
Enoch  was  translated  that  he  should  not  see  death,'; 
&c.  "But  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  pleas'e 
him;  for  he  that  comcth  to  God  nujst  believe  that  hr 
is,  and  that  he  is  a  r ew order  of  tkcm  who  diliirentlv 
seek  him."  Here  St.  Pnul  criyes  us  to  understanil 
that  the  "faitir  which  procured  for  Abel,  Enoch, 
Noah,  and  all  the  other  patriarchs,  the  grace  of  God. 
was  their  belief  in  the  existence  of  God,  and  in  his 
being  their  rewarder,  and  not  in  any  sacrifice  personal 
or  vicarious.  What  could  prophetic  anticipation  by 
Abraham,  of  the  divine  commission  of  Jesus,  have, 
to  do  with  AbePs  conduct,  in  rendering  his  sacrifices 
acceptable  to  God,  that  any  one  can  esteem  the  one 
as  the  necessary  consequence  of  the  other?     Moses 

^ayj^Dr  Sykos  in  lor.  "  that  Mo.es  looked  upon  the  contempt  and  indignity 
which  he  uncervv-ent  on  account  of  his  professing  himself  a  Jew,  a«  much 
preferable  to  a  I  the  riches  and  honors  „f  Egypt."  See  also  Whithy,  in  loc. 
Dr  Newcome  .s  \  ers.on  is,  "  such  reproach  as  Christ  endured,"  which  is  al- 
so the  interpretation  of  Photius,  Crellius.  and  Mr.  Lindscv.  Sequel,  page  '>7k 


i 


having  called  l.imself  a  Jew,  gave  preference  to  the 
.erm  "anointed,"  or  "  Israelite,"  a  term  of  reproach 
.'...oiig  the  Lgyptians  in  those  days,  overall  the  rich- 
<s  and  honor  of  Egypt,  which  he  might  have  obtain- 
cd   by  dec  anng    himself  an  Egyptian   instead   of  a 
Jew ;  or  Moses  esteemed  (accord.ng  to   the  English 
version)    ,„    his   prophetic   power,    the   reproach    to 
"l-ch  Christ  would  be   made  liable  by   the  Jews   in 
the  ful/.lment  of  his  divine  commission,  greater  rich- 
es than  all  the  grandeur  of  Egyptian  unbelievers.- 
Hut   neither  explanation  can  support   the  idea   that 
Abe  ,  or  any  other   patriarch,  had  in  view  the  sacri- 
hcial  death  of  Jesus   in  rendering   their  olTerinc.  ac- 
ceptable to  Cod.  ° 

It  is  true,   as  the  Editor  observes,  that  sacrifice, 
are  divine  institutions  as  a  manifestation  of  obedience 
lo  God,  through  the  oblation  of  any  thing  that  mav 
be  dear  to  man,   whether  common,   as  an  animal,  o'r 
dearly  valuable,  as  one's  o«n  son.      But  thev  are  not 
represented    in   any    of  the  sacred  books  as  means, 
having  intrinsically  the  power  of  procuring  men  par- 
don and  eternal  salvation.     They  seem,  in  fact,  in- 
tended for  men  unaccustomed  lo  the  worship  of  God 
'"  truth  and  spirit.     The  following  passages  suffice 
to  illustrate  this    beyond   doubt.      Micah  vi.  7.  8  :— 
••  Will  the  Lord  be  pleased  with  thousands  of  rams, 
or  with  ten  thousands  of  rivers  of  oil  ?     Shall  I  give 
my  (list  born  for  my  transgression;  the  fruit  of  my 
body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ?    He  hath  shewed  thee, 
O  man,  what  is  good,  and  what  doth  the  Lord  re- 
<l'nre  of  thee  hul  lo  do  jii^lh,,  and  to  love  mercy,  and 
'"    n-alf.-  humbly   with    ihv    God?"      Here  .Fohovah. 


'^'H 


r 


I 


r^-- 


i 


;J2 


while  shewing  his  displensiire  at  mere  ariiiiial  sacrilic-' 
es,  enjoins  just  actions  and  liumihty  in  heu  of   them, 
as  worthy  to  be  accepted  by  God,  without  substitut- 
ing human  sacrifices  in  their  stead.      Hosea  vi.   6: — 
"  For  I  desired  mercy  and  not  sacrifice^  and  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  more  than  burnt-oiferings."    Isaiah    1  — 
11,  [i.  11,  16 — 18.]  -'To  what  purpose  is  the  multi- 
tude of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?  saith   the  Lord.     F 
am  full  of  the  burnt-offerings  of  rams,  and  the  fat  of 
fed  beasts;  and  I  dclir^ht  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks, 
or  of  lambs,  or  of  he-goats. —  Wash  you,  make  vou 
clean;  put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before 
mine  eyes  ;  cease  to  do  evil ;  learn  to  do  well ;  seek 
judgment,  relieve   the  oppressed,  judge  the  father- 
less, plead  for  the   widow.     Come  now,  and  let  us 
reason  together,  saith  the  Lord  ;  though  your  sins 
be  as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  as  white  as  snoWj*''  (fee. — 
Does  not  Jehovah  here  substitute  oood  works  alone 
for  sacrifices,  as   real   means   of  takmg  away   sins? 
Psalm  1.  8  [8 — 15,]     "I  will   not   reprove  thee   for 
thv  sacrifices  or  thy   burnt-offbrmjjs,   to   have   been 
continually  before  me.     1  will  take  no  bullock  out  of 
thy  house,  nor  he-goats  out  of  thy  folds.     For  every 
beast   of  the  forest  is   mine,  and   the  cattle  upon  a 
thousand  hills.     I  know  all  the   fowls   of  the    moun- 
tains ;  and  the  wild  beasts  of  the  field  are  mine.     If 
I  were  hungry  I  would  not  tell  thee  ;  for  the   world 
is  mine,  and  the  fulness  thereof.      Will  I  eat  the  flesh 
of  bulls,  or  drink  the  blood  of  goats  ?     Offer  unto 
God  thanksgiving  ;  and  pay  thy  vows  unto  the  Most 
High  ;  and  call   upon  me  in  the   day  of  trouble  :   I 
Avill  deliver  thee,  and  thou  sluilt  <rlorifv  me.**      .rrho- 


i 


^ 


33 


vah,  who  protests  against  the  idea  of  the  flesh  of 
bulls  being  supposed  his  food,  and  the  blood  of  goats 
his  drink,  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  had  delight 
in  human  blood,  the  blood  of  his  beloved  Son.  Sam- 
uel XV.  22  : — ^"  And  Samuel  said,  Hath  the  Lord  as 
great  delight  in  burnt-offerings  and  sacrifices  as  in 
obeying  the  voice  of  the  Lord  ?  Behold,  to  obey  is 
better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken  than  the  fat  of 
rams."  Proverbs  xxi.  3  : — "  To  do  justice  and  judg- 
ment is  more  acceptable  to  the  Lord  than  sacrifice.-' 
Eccles.  v.  1  : — "  Keep  thy  foot  when  thou  goest  to  the 
house  of  God,  and  be  more  ready  to  hear  than  to 
give  the  sacrifice  of  fools ;  for  they  consider  not 
that  they  do  eviV* 

It  is  now  left  for  us  to  ascertain  in  what  sense  we 
should  take  such  phrases  as,  "  This  man,  after  he 
had  offered  one  sacrifice  for  sins ;"  "  Christ  hath 
once  appeared  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of 
himself;"  "Jesus  also,  that  he  might  sanctify  the 
people  with  his  own  blood,  suffered  without  the 
gate  ;"  "  1  am  the  living  bread  ;"  "  If  any  man  eat 
of  this,"  &c.  Whether  do  these  passages  imply  that 
Jesus,  though  he  preferred  mercy  to  sacrifice,  (Mat- 
thew ix.  13,  xii.  7,)  did  actually  sacrifice  himself,  and 
offer  his  own  blood  to  God  as  an  atonement  for  the 
sins  of  others;  or  do  they  mean  that  Jesus,  knowing 
already  that  the  fulfilment  of  his  divine  commission 
would  endanger  his  life,  never  hesitated  to  execute 
it,  and  suifered  his  blood  to  be  shed  in  saving  men 
from  sin  through  his  divine  |)recepts  and  pure  ex- 
ample, which  were  both  opposed  to  the  religious 
svstem  adopted  by  his  cotemporarv  Jews  ?     Were 


il 


V    - 


M 


>TC  to  follow  the  former  mode  of  interpretation,  and 
fake  all  these  phrases  in  their  strictly  literal  sense 
T^'e  must  be  persuaded  to  believe  that  God,  not  be- 
ing contented  with  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats,  and 
other  animal  sacrifices,  offered  to  him  by  the  Israel- 
ites,  insisted  upon  the  offer  of  the  blood  and   life  of 
his  Son,  as  the  condition  of  his  forgiving  the  sins  of 
men  ;  and  that  Jesus  accordingly  offered  his  blood  to 
propitiate  God,  and  also  proposed  to  men  actually 
to  eat  his  flesh  !      Would  not  the  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity,  in  this  case,  representing  God   as   delighted 
with  human  victims,  and  directing   men  to   cannibal- 
ism, appear  monstrous  to  every  civilized  being?    No 
©ne,  unless  biassed  by  prejudices,  can  justify  such  in- 
consistency,  as    to    interpret    literally   some  of   the 
above-mentioned  phrases  in  support  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  atonement,  and  explain  the  last  quoted  figu- 
ratively, as  they  are  all  confessedly  alike   subversive 
©f  every  rational  idea  of  the  nature  of  the  divine  jus- 
tice and  mercy. 

To  avoid  such  a  stigma  upon  the  pure  religion  of 
Jesus,  it  is  incumbent,  I  think,  upon  us  to  follow  the 
latter  mode  of  interpretation,  and  to  understand,  from 
the  passages  referred  to,  that  Jesus,  the  spiritual 
Lord  and  King  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  in  fulfilment  of 
the  duties  of  his  mission,  exposed  his  own  life  for  the 
benefit  of  his  subjects,  purged  their  sins  by  his  doc- 
trines, and  persevered  in  executing  the  commands  of 
God,  even  to  the  undergoing  of  bodily  suffering  in 
the  miserable  death  of  the  cross  ;  a  self-devotion  or 
sacrifice,  of  which  no  Jewish  high  priest  fiad  ever  of- 
fered an  examj)le. 


3d 

Ought  not  this  belief  in  the  unbounded  beneficence 
of  Jesus  to  excite  superior  gratitude,  love,  and  reve- 
rence towards  our  Saviour  and  King,  than  the  idea 
that  he,  as  God,  above  mortal  afflictions,  borrowed 
human  nature  for  a  season,  and  offered  this  fictitious 
man  as  a  sacrifice  for  the  remission  of  sin,  while  he 
himself  was  no  more  afllicted  with  that  sacrificial 
death  than  with  the  sufferinijs  of  other  human  indi- 
viduals.  If  there  be,  in  this  latter  case,  any  grati- 
tude felt  for  the  afllictions  which  attached  to  the 
death  of  the  cross,  it  should  be  manifested  to  that 
temporary  man  Jesus,  and  not  to  Jesus  the  Christ, 
whom  the  Editor  and  other  Trinitarians  esteem  as 
God,  above  pain  and  death. 

If  it  be  urged,  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  common 
justice  to  pardon  sin  that  requires  the  capital  punish- 
ment of  death  without  an  atonement  for  it,  it  mar 
be  replied,  that  the  perfection  of  divine  justice,  as 
well  as  other  attributes  of  God,  should  not  be  meas- 
ured by  what  are  found  in,  and  adopted  by,  the  hu- 
man race.  Is  it  consistent  with  our  common  notions 
of  justice  to  visit  the  sins  of  fathers  on  their  descen- 
dants, as  God  ascribed  to  himself,  (Exodus  xx.  .5.)? 
Is  it  consistent  with  our  common  notions  of  justice  to 
afflict  men  with  iniinite  punishment  for  their  finite 
guilt,  as  Jesus  declares  in  Matthew  xviii.  8.?  Even 
in  the  present  case,  would  it  be  consistent  with  com- 
mon notions  of  justice  to  afflict  an  innocent  man  w^'th 
the  death  of  the  cross,  for  sins  committed  by  others  i 
even  supposing  the  innocent  man  should  voluntarily 
offer  his  life  in  behalf  of  those  others?  We  can 
have  no  idea  of  the  perfection  of  divine  justice,  mer- 


36 


I'j,  and  wrath,  unless  from  what  is  revealed  lo  us; 
and  as  we  find,  in  the  sacred  books,  that  sins  have 
been  pardoned  in  consequence  of  the  intercession  of 
righteous  men,  witliout  any  sacrificial  atonement,  we 
should,  therefore,  be  contented  with  thoso  authori- 
ties, and  should  not  entertain  doubt  as  to  pardon  be- 
ing bestowed  upon  those  who  tiave  had  the  advan- 
tage of  the  intercession  of  Jesus,  exalted  as  he  was  by 
God  over  all  prophets  and  righteous  men  that  ever 
Hved. 

Numb.  xiv.  19 — 20: — Moses  prayed  to  the  Lord, 
"Pardon,  I  beseech  thee,  the  iniquity  of  tfiis  people 
according  unto  the  greatness  of  thy  mercy,  and  as 
thou  hast  forgiven  this  j:>eople  from  Egypt  even  until 
now  ;  and  the  Lord  said  I  have  pardoned  according 
io  thy  word,'"  2  Chron.  xxx.  18 — 20  : — "  For  a  mul- 
titude of  the  people,  even  many  of  Ephraim  and 
Mannasseh,  Issachar  and  Zebulon,  had  not  cleansed 
themselves,  yet  did  they  eat  the  passover  otherwise 
than  it  was  written.  But  Hezekiah  prayed  for  them, 
saying.  The  good  Lord  pardon  every  one  that  pre- 
pareth  his  heart  to  seek  God,  the  Lord  God  of  his 
fathers,  though  he  be  not  cleansed  according  to  the 
purification  of  the  sanctuary.  And  the  Lord  hear- 
kened to  Hezekiah,  and  healed  the  people."  Psalm 
cvi.  23  : — ''Therefore  he  said  that  he  would  destroy 
them,  had  not  Moses,  his  chosen,  stood  before  him 
in  the  breach  to  turn  away  his  wrath,  lest  he  should 
destroy  them."  Did  not  Jehovah  here  forgive  the 
sins  of  Israel  from  the  intercession  of  Moses,  without 
having  the  least  reference  to  the  offer  of  animal  or 
human  blood  ?     Psalm  xxxii.  /i : — "  I  acknowled<red 


J/ 

my  sin  unto  thee,  and  mine  iniquity  have  I  not  hid  ; 
I  said,  1  will  confess  my  transgressions  unto  the  Lord, 
and  thou Jorgavest  the  iniquity  of  my  sin."  Were 
not  sins  forgiven  in  this  instance  also,  through  con- 
fession and  humility  without  blood-offerings  ?  Psalm 
cxli.  2  : — "  Let  my  prayer  be  set  forth  before  thee  as 
I  incense  ;  and  the  lifting  up  of  my  hands  as  the  even- 
'  ing  sacrifice."     Isaiah  Iv.  7  : — "  Let  the  wicked  for- 

1  sake  his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts  ; 
'  and  let  him  return  unto  i\\G  Lord,  and  he  will  have 
mercy  upon  him  ;  and  to  our  God,  for  he  will  abun- 
dantly pardon."  Jer.  vii.  21—23  :— "  Thus  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel,  Put  your  burnt'ojhr' 
ings  unto  your  sacrifices^  and  eat  flesh.  For  I  spake 
not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them  in  the 
day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
concerning  burnt-offerings  or  sacrifices.  But  this 
thing  commanded  I  them,  saying,  obey  my  voice^  and 
I  will  be  your  God  and  ye  shall  be  my  people,"  &*c. 
Here  we  find  prayers  and  obedience  preferred  to 
animal  sacrifices  as  means  of  pardon,  and  no  refer- 
ence, direct  or  figurative,  to  propitiation,  to  be  made 
by  human  blood.  Such  an  attempt,  therefore,  as  to 
represent  human  blood,  or  that  of  God  in  human 
form,  in  lieu  of  animal  blood,  as  an  indispensable 
atonement  for  sins,  is,  I  think,  unscriptural. 

The  Editor  quotes,  (page  519,)  Heb.  x: — "It  is 
not  possible  that  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats 
should  take  away  sins.  Sacrifice  and  offering  thou 
wouldest  not,  but  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me  ; 
in  burnt-offerings  and  sacrifices  thou  hast  had  no 
pleasure."     And  he  attempts  thereby  to  prove  that 


^if 


3« 

••  sacriiices,  considered  in  themselves,  then,  were  nev- 
er desired  by  God  ;  tliej  are  approved  merely  with 
a  view  to  his  making  atonement  for  whom  God  had 
prepared  a  body,"  and  that  "they  ceased  after  he 
had  oifercd  liimself  a  sacrifice  for  sin."  How  strange 
is  the  idea,  that  ''  God,  who  preserves  man  aiid  beast? 
nor  suffers  a  sparrow  to  fall  to  the  ground  without 
his  permission;"  and  by  wliom  sacrifices  "were  nev- 
er desired  for  their  own  sake,"  should  have  caused 
millions  of  animals  to  be  slaughtered,  at  dilFerent 
times,  by  men,  under  the  mistaken  notion  of  their 
being  an  atonement  for  sins,  while  he  has  been  re- 
mitting iniquity  from  eternity,  referring  only  to  the 
real  and  sufficient  atonement  made  by  Jesus  for  the 
sins  of  all  men  that  ever  lived  from  the  })eginning  of 
the  world  ! 

How  inconsistent  is  such  an  idea  with  the  known 
mercy  of  that  Providence,  whose  unwillingness  to  re- 
ceive human  sacrifices  was  such,  that  when  Abraham 
had  proved  his  fidelity  by  binding  his  son  on  the 
altar,  God  stayed  his  hand  from  the  sacrifice,  and 
produced  a  ram,  unexj)cctedly,  before  him,  which  he 
was  graciously  pleased  to  accept  as  an  oflering  in  the 
stead  of  Isaac! — (Gen.  xxii.  13.)  How  can  we  imag- 
ine that  God  should  have  received  the  ofTerint'"  which 
he  himself  had  thus  prepared,  with  reference  solely 
to  the  future  sacrifice  of  a  being  far  Siipcrior  in  ex- 
cellence  to  Isaac,  whose  life  he  mercifully  preserved? 
As  to  the  above  cited  verses,  they  rather  corrobo- 
rate the  second  mode  of  interj)rctation,  noticed  in  the 
preceding  paragraphs,  than  the  doctrine  of  a  real 
human  sacrifice  in  the  Christian  dispensation:  for.  in 


I 


39 

verses  fifth  and  sixth,  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  declares  the  dissatisfaction  of  God  with 
sacrifices  and  offerings,  in  general  terms,  without  lim- 
iting them  to  any  particular  species,  whether  of  man 
or  of  animal.  The  language  of  the  fifth  verse,  "  Sac- 
rifice and  otfering  thou  wouldest  not,  but  a  body  hast 
thou  prepared  me,"  ccnfirm.a  the  idea  that  the  di- 
vine disregard  of  mere  sacrifice  led  to  the  prepara- 
tion of  a  body  for  Jesus,  through  which  he  could  im- 
part to  mankind  the  perfection  of  the  will  and  laws 
of  God,  in  a  manner  consistent  with  the  divine  na- 
ture, teaching  them  to  yield  to  God  a  heart-felt,  in- 
stead of  a  ceremonial  and  outward  obedience,  and 
thereby  putting  an  end  to  the  further  effusion  of 
blood,  as  a  testimony  of  humility,  gratitude,  and  de- 
votion. 

Hence,  it  appears  more  consistent  with  the  context 
and   the  general  tenor  of  scripture,  to  understand  by 
the    phrase,   "The    offbring   of  the   body   of  Jesus 
Christ,"  (quoted  often  by  the  Editor,)  the  death  of 
Jesus  as  a  spiritual  and  virtual  sacrifice  for  the   sins 
of  all  those  for  whom  he  became  a    mediator;  inas- 
much as  by  that  death  the  blessed  Saviour  testified 
his  perfect  obedience  and  devotion  to  the  will  of  his 
heavenly  Father,  and  thereby  vindicated    to  himself 
the   unlimited   favor   of   God.      Durino-    his   life    he 
instructed  mankind   how  they  might  render  them- 
selves  worthy  of  the   divine    mercy :   by   his  death 
he  qualified  himself  to  be   their  intercessor  at   the 
heavenly  throne,  when  sincere  repentance  was  to  be 
ofTered  by  them  instead  of  perfect  duty.     We  may 
easily  account  for  the  adoption  by  the  apostles,  with 


I 


I 


(i" 


A 


4      I 


40 


IJ 


respect  to  him,  of  such  terms  as  sacrihce  and  atone- 
ment for  sin,  and  their  representing  Jesus  as  the  high 
priest,  engaged  to  take  away  the  sins  of  the  world 
bj  means  oi  his  blood.  These  were  modes  of  speech 
made  use  of  in  allusion  to  the  sacrifices  and  blood- 
offerings  which  the  Jews  and  their  high  priest  used 
to  make  for  the  reinission  of  sins;  and  the  apostles 
wisely  accommodated  their  instructions  to  the  ideas 
and  forms  of  language  familiar  to  those  whom  they 
addressed. 

How  inconsistent  would  it  be,  in  the  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  to  declare  in  one  place,  that 
God  would  not  have  sacrifice  and  offering;  and  again 
to  announce,  almost  at  the  same  moment,  that  he 
was  so  pleased  with  sacrifice,  even  with  a  human 
sacrifice,  tliat  for  its  sake  he  would  forgive  the  sins 
of  the  world!  Besides,  in  the  Christian  dispensation, 
sacrifice  implies  a  spiritual  ode  ring  required  by  God? 
not  only  from  the  author  of  this  religion,  but  also 
from  his  disciples  and  followers;  a  fact  which  may 
be  illustrated  by  sacred  authority.  1  Peter  ii.  4,  5  : — 
^'  To  whom  coming,  as  unto  a  living  stone,  disallowed 
indeed  of  men,  but  chosen  of  God  and  precious,  ye  al- 
so, as  lii^ely  sto7ies,  are  built  up  a  spiritual  house,  an 
holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices  accep- 
table to  God  bv  Jesus  Christ." 

I  am  not  at  all  disposed  to  dispute  the  assertion  of 
the  Editor  (page  532,)  that  "  a  priest  without  atone- 
ment, however,  had  no  existence  in  the  old  Testa- 
ment ;"  but  1  must  say  that  a  priest  without  atone- 
ment has  existence  in  the  New  Testament,  and  refer 
the  Editor   to  the  following  verses,  excluding  those 


that    are   applied   to  Jesus.      Rev.  i.  6,  -And  hath 
made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God  ;"  xx.   6,   "  But 
they  shall  be  priests  of  God  and  of  Christ,  and  shall 
reign  Avith  Inm  a  thousand  years;"  1  Peter  ii.  f),  "  Ye 
also,  as  lively  stones,  are  built  up  a  spiritual  house,  an 
holy    priesthood."       Moreover,  in    explaining    such 
phrases    as,  "I  am  the  living  bread,'-— "  If  any  man 
cat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  forever,"— "The  bread 
tliat  I  will  give  is  my  flesh,"—"  Except  ye   eat   the 
flesh  of    the  Son  of  Man,"  and  ''  Unless  ye   cat    his 
flesh,  and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you,"— 
''  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and  my  blood  is  dn'nk  in, 
deed;"    Protestant  commentators  take  upon   them- 
selves to   interpret,  that  these  phrases    are    in    allu- 
sion to  the  manner  of  sacrifice,   and   that  the  eating 
of  the  flesh  of  Jesus,  and  drinking  his  blood,  must  be 
understood  in  a   spiritual,  not   in  a  carnal  sense.     If 
these  writers  make  so  direct  an  encroachment  upon 
the  literal  sense  of  those  phrases,  in  order  to  avoid 
the  idea  of  cannibalism  being  a  tenet  of  Christianity, 
why  should    I  not  be  justified  upon  the   same  princi- 
ples, and  on  the  authority  of  the  apostle,   in  under- 
standing by  sacrifice,  in  the  language  of  the  apostie, 
a  virtual  oblation— that  Christianity  may  not  be  re]> 
resented  as  a  religion  founded  upon  the  horrible  svs- 
tcm  of  human  victims? 

The  Editor  first  refers  (page  520)  to  "Noah's 
sacrifice  on  his  coming  out  of  the  ark  ;"  whence  he 
concludes,  that  all  the  genuine  religion  of  the  new 
world  was  founded  on  the  future  atonement  made  by 
Christ.  He  again  mentions  God  having  made  \x 
promise  to  Abraham,  tliat  in  him  "shall  all  the  fam« 


'  '.I 


* 


1 


.  > 


'■   «l 


.<f 


I 


42 

ilies  ol  liie  earth  be  blessed,''  a  blessing  wliicli  came 
to  the  Gentiles  through  Jesus.  He  considers  thi?i 
circumstance  of  the  communication  of  blessing,  as 
fully  foretelling  the  atonement  of  Jesus.  The  Edi- 
tor has  also  quoted  the  passage  in  ./o6,  "  I  know- 
that  my  Redeemer  liveth,  and  that  he  shall  stand  in 
the  latter  day  upon  the  earth;"  being  of  opinion* 
that  the  term  Redeemer,  being  applied  to  Chnst. 
j)roves  either  his  atonement  or  his  deity.  I  must 
confess  my  inability  to  tind  out  the  connexion  between 
these  authorities  and  the  conclusion  drawn  by  the 
Editor  from  them.  Did  God,  who,  according  to  thf^ 
Rev.  Editor,  had  no  delight  even  in  animal  sacrifice, 
anticipate  great  delight  in  human  sacrifice,  when 
Noah  made  an  offering  to  him? 

May  we  not  admit,  that  the  divine  promise  to 
Abraham  has  been  fulfilled  in  the  blessings  we  enjoy, 
derived  from  the  sacred  instructions  of  Jesus,  with- 
out assuming  that  other  advantages  have  been  reap 
cd  by  us  from  the  circumstance  of  his  having  shed 
his  blood  for  us,  exclusively  considered?  If  not,  how 
can  Jesus  assure  us  of  the  divine  blessing,  merely 
through  the  observance  of  his  instructions?  Matthew 
v.  3 — 11,  Luke  xi.  28,  "But,  said  he,  (Jesus)  Yea. 
rather  blessed  are  thev  that  hear  the  word  of  God. 
and  keep  it." 

Could  not  Job,  or  anv  one,  call  another  his  rr- 
deemei  or  deliverer,  without  having  allusion  to  \i\> 
blood  ?  Cannot  one  being  redeem  anotiter  witlioul 
sacrificing  his  own  blood  ?  How  is  it,  then,  we 
find  Jehovah,  the  Father  of  all,  called  redeemer, 
ihoufirh    in  tliat    en  pant  v    not     ron^^idrred  even    bv 


} 


J.i 

Trinitarians  to  have  had  his  blood  shed  as  an 
atonement  ?  Isaiah  Ixiii.  16:  "Thou,  O  Lord,  art 
our  Father,  our  Redeemer."  Isaiah  Ix.  16:  "Shalt 
know  that  I,  Jehovah,  am  thy  Saviour  and  thy  Re- 
deemer." 

I  wonder  at  the  assertion  of  the  Editor,  that"  the 
Mesiah  fs  not  termed  a  redeemer  merely  on  account 
of  his   teaching  or  his  example.     These,"  he   says, 
••  could  be  of  no  value  to  Job,  who  lived  so  long  be- 
fore the  appearance  of  Christ  in  the  earth."     I  wish 
to  know  whether  Job,  an  inspired  writer,  is  to  be 
considered    as   possessed   of  a   knowledge  of  future 
events  or  not  ?  as,  in  the  former  case,  the  circumstanc- 
es of  Christ's  atoning  for  sin,  according  to  the  Edi- 
to?',  and  the  nature  and  import  of  his  divine  instruc- 
tions, were  equally  known  to  him,  and  he  could  call 
the  Messiah  redeemer  in  cither  view^      In  the  latter 
case,  (i.  e.  if  he  w^as  unacquainted  with  future  events 
while  writing  this  passage,)  then  the  doctrine  of  the 
atonement,    and     the    saving    truths    inculcated    by 
Christ,   were,  of  course,  equally  hidden  from    him. 
and  neither,  consequently,   could    be  of  anv  value  to 
Job,    "  who  lived  so  long  before  Christ's  appearance 
In  the  earth."     The  fact  is,  the  verse  of  Job   quot- 
ed by  the    Editor,  has  no  such  obvious  reference  to 
the  Messiah,  that  any  one  can  be  justified  in  applying 
to  Jesus  the  term   "  Redeemer,"  found  in  the  same 
verse.      I  therefore  quote  it  with  its  context,  that  my 
readers  may  have  a   better  opportunity  of  consider- 

'm<r    the  subject   in  question.     Job    xix.    24 — 26  i 

'•  That  they  (my   words)  were  graven  with   an   iron 
f)en  and  lead  in  the  rock  forever!     For  I  know  that 


^T 


i 


I 


Iv 


44 

my  Kcdcoincr  livetli,  and  that  \w  shall  htaiul  at  the 
latter  da)*  upon  the  earth.  And  though  after  mv 
skin  icorms  dcstroij  x\\h  body,  yet  in  inv  ilesh  shall  / 
s^ee  Godr 

The  Editor  havinor  urged  in  his  (irst  review,  (page 
101,)  that   the    circumstance  of    tlui    term    '*  lamf/' 
being  twice  aj)plied   to  Jesus  by  John   the    Baptist, 
shewed  that  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  sacrifice 
his  life  as  an  atonement  for  sin ;   I  observed  to  the 
Editor  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (page  212,)  that  such 
terms  as    "lamb"    and    "sheep"    were   applied    in 
scripture    to    the   disciples    of  Jesus   also  ;   many    of 
whom    likewise  suffered  death  in   their  attempt  to 
withdraw  men  from  sin,  yet  in  these  cases  no  allu- 
sion to  the    sacrificial   lamb   has  ever   been  made ; 
and  that  it  might  be,  therefore,  safely  inferred,  that 
the  epithets   "lamb"  and   "  sheep"  are  merely  figu- 
rative terms  for  innocence  subjected  to  persecution. 
The  Editor,  however,   without  noticing  this  obser- 
vation, quotes  in  his  present  review  (page  522)  some 
verses  of  the  epistles  of  Peter  and  John,  in  which 
the  apostles    use  the  same  epithet  "lamb,"  applied 
to  their  gracious  Master.     It  is  obvious,  from  what 
I  stated  in  my  Second  Appeal,  that  I  did  not  dispute 
the  application  of  that  term  to  Jesus  in  the  scriptu- 
ral books.     I    only    maintained,  that    no    Christian, 
whether  primitive  or  modern,  could  ever  appiv  the 
word  "  lamb,"  in  its  literal  sense,  to  Jesus,   who,  as 
being    above    the   angels  of  God,  is  of  course  far 
above  the  nature  of  a  "lamb;"  and  that,  under  this 

*  ir^HN   signifies   prop^rTy  nftent-arda.  without   anv  reA-rcnrp  to  a   partir- 
ular  (lav.  ' 


f 


I 


i:> 


consideration,  it  must  have  been  used  for  innocence 
subjected  to  persecution,  as  we  find  the  use  of  the 
word  "  lamb"  very  frequent  elsewhere  when  appli- 
ed to  man.  John  xxi.  15,  (already  quoted  in  the 
Second  Appeal)  "  feed  my  lambs."  Luke  x.  3,  "  Be- 
hold, I  send  you  forth  as  lambs  among  wolves." 
Genesis  xxii.  7,  8,  "  And  he  (Isaac)  said.  Behold 
the  fire  and  the  wood  ;  but  where  is  the  lamb  for 
a  burnt-olFering?  And  Abraham  said,  My  son,  God 
will  provide  himself  a  lamb  for  a  burn t-ofife ring." 
Wherein,  Abraham  doubtless  meant  his  innocent 
son  about  to  be  subjected  to  a  violent  death,  hid- 
ing the  commandment  of  God  from  him,  as  appears 
from  the  following  verses  : — "  And  they  came  to  the 
place  which  God  had  told  him  of  ;  and  Abraham 
built  an  altar  there,  and  laid  the  wood  in  order,  and 
bound  Isaac  his  son  and  laid  him  on  the  altar  upon 
the_wood  :  and  Abraham  stretched  forth  his  hand, 
and  took  the  knife  to  slay  his  son."  Jeremiah  xi. 
19,  "But  I  was  like  a  lamb  or  an  ox  that  is  broufirht 
to  slaughter." 

Upon  the  same  principle,  the  apostles  generallv 
used  "  blood"  for  condescension  to  death,  and  "  sac- 
rifice" for  a  virtual  one,  as  1  noticed  fullv  in  the 
[)receding  paragraphs. 

The  Editor  relates,  (page  524)  that  the  priest  used 
to  lay  liis  hands  on  the  head  of  a  living  goat,  "and 
confess  over  him  all  the  iniquities  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  putting  them  on  the  head  of  the  goat,  and 
by  the  hand  of  a  fit  person  to  send  it  away  into  the 
wilderness  as  an  atonement  for  all  their  sins  in  everv 
vear."      He  then  infers,  from  tliis  circumstance,  that 


/■-.. 


10 

••  commandments    like   these  did  more   than  merely 
foretel  the  atonement  of  Christ/'      Were  we  to  con- 
sider  at  all  the  annual  scape-goat    as  an  indication  t,f 
some  other  atonement  for  sin,  we  must  esteem  it  as  n 
sign  of  Aaron's  bearing  the  iniquities  of  Israel,  both 
the  scape-goat  and  Aaron  having  alike  borne  the  sin>i 
of  others  without  sacrificing  their  lives:    but    by   no 
means  can  it  be  supposed  a  sign  of  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  w^ho,  according  to  the  author,  bore  the   sin^ 
of   men   by  the  sacrifice   of   his  own   life,  and  had 
therefore    no    resemblance    to     the     scape-goat    or 
Aaron.     Exodus  xxviii.  38  :— "  And  it  shall  be  upon 
Aaron's  forehead  that  Aaron  may  bear  the  iniquity 
of  the  holy  things  which  the  children  of  Israel  shall 
hallow  in  all  their  holy  gifts  ;  and  it  shall  be  alway-^ 
upon  his   forehead,  that  they  may   be  accepted  be- 
fore  the  Lord."  I  wonder  that  the  Rev.  Editor  him- 
self notices  here  that  the  iniquities  of  Israel  were  for- 
given by  confession  over  the  scape-goat,  without  ani- 
mal or  human  victims,  and  yet  represents  the  circum- 
stance of  the  scape-s;o7iU  as  a  prediction  of  the  sacri- 
ficial death  of  Christ,  and  insists  upon  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  being  founded  upon  the  elfusion  of  blood. 

The  Rev.  Editor  now  begins  with  Psalm  u.  1. 
(page  527)  stating  that  in  Acts  iv.  the  apostles  lifted 
lip  "  their  voices  with  one  accord  to  God  in  the  very 
words  of  the  Psalms;"  adding  verse  27,  "  For  of  a 
truth,  against  thy  holy  child  Jesus,  whom  thou  hast 
anointed,  both  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate,  with  the 
Gentiles,  and  the  people  of  Israel,  were  gathered  to- 
o-ether."  Secondly,  he  quotes  Psalm  xvi.  8 — 11. 
romparinsr  them   with  Arts  ii.  2.1—27:   3dly,  Psalm 


47 

iMi.  1,  couipanng  It  with  Heb.  li.  10 — 12;  4thiy. 
Psalm  xxxi.  5,  while  he  repeats  Psalm  xl.  6 — 8,  com- 
paring them  to  Hebrew  x.  4;  5thly,  Psalm  xlv. 
6,  7,  comparing  it  [them]  with  Hebrew  i.  8 — 12; 
Gthly,  Psalm  Ixviii.   18,   applying  it  to  Ephesians  iv. 

8 11 ;  7thly,  Psalm  Ixix.  1,  2,  comparing  them  with 

John  ii.  17,  "  The  zeal  of  thy  house  hath  eaten  me 
up,"  and  with  Romans  xv.  3,   "  Even  Christ  pleased 
not  himself;   but,  as  it  is  written,  The  reproaches  of 
them   that    reproached   thee   fell    on    me ;"    8thly, 
Psalm  Ixxii.  7—11,  17;   Othly, Psalm  Ixxxix.  19—37; 
lOthly,  Psalm  cii.  4,  5,  10,  quoting  immediately  after 
this,   Heb.   i.    7,    without   comparing    one    with  the 
other;   llthly,  Psalm  cxviii.  22;   12thly,  Psalm  ex. 
1,  4.     After  having  filled   up  more  than  six  pages 
(527 — 533)  with  the  quotations  of  the  above  Psalms, 
the  Editor  observes,  that,  "notwithstanding  the  abun- 
dant evidence  of  the  atonement,  and  even  the  deity 
of  Christ,  alrcadv  adduced  from  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  Psalms,"   kc.     But  i  regret   that  none  of  these 
Psalms  appear  to  me   to  bear  the  least  reference  to 
the  principle  of  vicarious  sacrifice,  as  an   atonement 
for  sin,  except  Psalm  fourteenth,  in  which  a  declara- 
tion of  the  displeasure  of  Jehovah  at  sacrifice  in  gen- 
eral is  made,  and  which  I  have  fully  examined  in  the 
preceding   paragraphs.     I  therefore  beg  my  readers 
to  look  over  all    the  Psalms  introduced  here  by  the 
Editor,  and  to  form  their  opinion  whether  these  are 
properly  applied  to  the  discussion  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  atonement  ;  and  should   they  find   them    having 
little   or  no   relation    to   a  proof   of   the  atonement, 
ihev  mav  then  judge  whether  the  frequent  complaint 


} 

\ 


'^. 


ir.i 


/ 


la 


49 


of  the    Editor,  of  the  ivant  of  roo/n,  ib  or  is  not  >voll 
founded. 

I  will  examine  liis  attempt  to  prove  the  deity  of 
Jesus,  from  some  of  these  Psalms,  in  a  subsequent 
chapter  on  the  Trinity,  but  cannot  omit  to  notice 
here  two  or  three  remarks  made  by  the  Editor,  in 
the  course  of  quoting  these  Psalms,  on  some  of  mv 
assertions  in  the  Second  Appeal,  leaving  a  decision 
on  them  to  the  free  judgment  of  the  public.  The 
Editor  having  quoted  Psalm  xl.  6 — 8,  and  compared 
these  verses  with  Hebrews  x.  4 — 7,  9,  thus  con- 
cludes, (Page  rrlH)  : — '•  By  these  declarations  various 
facts  are  established.  They  inform  us  that  th( 
grand  design  of  the  Son  in  becoming  man  was  that 
of  being  a  sacrifice  ;  w  hich  fullv  refutes  our  author*- 
assertion,  (page  202,)  that  the  sole  object  of  his  mis- 
sion was  to  preach  and  impart  divine  instructions." 
The  Editor,  1  am  sorry  to  say,  following  a  frequent 
practice  of  his  other  orthodox  brethren,  omits  the 
immediately  following  verses,  which  thoroughly  ex- 
])lain  whether  ''  the  will  of  God,"  mentioned  in  verse 
eighth  of  the  Psalm  quoted  by  the  Editor,  implies 
sacrifice  or  divine  instructions  : — "  I  deliorht  to  do  tin 
will,  O  my  God :  yea,  thy  law  is  within  my  heart. — 
J  have  preached  righteousness  in  the  great  congroia- 
tion:  lo,  I  have  not  refrained  my  lips,  O  Lord,  thoii 
knowest.  /  have  not  hid  thy  riijhteousness  within 
my  heart ;  7  have  declared  thy  faithfulness  and  thif 
salvation  :  1  have  not  concealed  thy  loving-kindness  and 
thy  truth  from  the  great  congregation."  It  is  non- 
left  to  the  public  to  judge  whether  Psalm  fortieth, 
quoted  by  the  Editor,  establishes   that    '•  the  grand 


» 


I 


> 


desit>-n  of  the  Son  in  becoming  man  was  that  of  being 
a  sacrifice,"  or  of  preaching  the  righteousness  of 
God  to  the  world,  and  declaring  his  truth  and  salva- 
tion to  them.  The  preparing  of  the  body  for  the 
Son,  as  found  in  Hebrews  x.  5,  implies,  of  course,  the 
necessity  of  his  being  furnished  with  a  body  in  preach- 
ing the  will  of  God  to  mortal  men;  a  body  which, 
in  the  fulfilment  of  his  commission,  Jesus  never  val- 
ued, but  exposed  to  danger,  and  virtually  offered  as 
a  sacrifice. 

It  is  worth  observing,  that  the  Editor,  though  he 
all'irms  positively  that  the  grand  object  of  the  Son's 
apj)earing  in  this  world  was  to  be  a  sacrifice,  and  not 
to  inculcate  divine  instructions,  and  thinks  it  proper 
to  rest  his  position  upon  a  comparison  of  the  above 
Psalm  with  Hebrews,  yet  never  attempts  to  recon- 
cile to  this  notion  the  verses  pointed  out  in  page  202 
of  my  Second  Appeal,  proving  that  the  object  of  his 
mission  was  to  preach  and  impart  divine  instructions. 
Are  we  to  place  greater  reliance  on  his  bare  affirma- 
tion, or  on  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself,  the  Lord 
and  King  of  Jews  and  Gentiles? 

Not  finding  a  single  assertion  in  the  Scriptures  that 
can  support  his  above  notion,  the  Editor  lays  stress 
upon  John  x.  17:  *' Therefore  doth  my  Father 
love  me,  because  I  lay  down  my  life,  that  I  might 
take  it  again."  Do  these  words  imply  any  thing 
more  than  his  attributing  the  love  of  the  Father  to- 
wards the  Son,  to  his  implicit  obedience,  even  to  the 
loss  of  his  own  life,  taken  by  the  rebellious  Jews  ? 
Should  a  general  inform  his  fellow  soldiers,  that  his 
king  is  attached  to  him,  in  consequence  of  his  being 


ti 


r 


r>o 


ol 


ready  to  give  up  his  life  in  the  discharge  of  his  duty, 
eau  we  thence  infer  that  tlie  grand  design  of  tiie 
kino-,  in  appointing  him  general,  is  liis  death,  and  not 
his  reconciling  rebels  to  their  merciful  king,  through 
friendl)  entreat)  and  oilers  of  amnesty,  which  we 
know  he  fias  employed? 

The  second  conclusion  of  the  F^ditor  from  the 
above  quoted  Psalms  and  Hebrews,  is,  that  *'  they 
also  demonstrate  that  the  Son  delighted  in  olFering 
himself  a  sacrifice  ;  whicli  refutes  that  dreadful  as- 
sertion, that  Jesus  declared  great  aversion  to  the 
death  of  the  cross,  and  merely  yielded  to  it,  as 
knowino-  that  the  will  of  his  Father  rendered  such 
death  unavoidable."  I  find  no  mention  made  in 
Hebrews  x.  much  less  in  Psalm  xl.  of  the  Son's  "dc- 
lio-htin<>-  in  olferiniJ:  himself  as  a  sacrifice  ;"  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  evidently  found  in  Hebrews  x.  that 
whatever  the  Son  performed  with  the  body  prepar- 
ed him  was  entirely  through  his  implicit  obedi- 
ence to  the  will  of  the  Father.  Verse  7:  "Then 
said  1,"  (the  Son)  '"Lo,  1  come  to  do  thy  will,  O  God.'' 
^'Then  said  he,"  (the  Son)  ^'Lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will, 
OGod,"  ver.  9;  an  assertion  which  is  thoroughly  con- 
firmed by  what  I  quoted  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (pp 
206,  207,)  part  of  which  I  am  necessitated  to  re- 
peat here,  to  shew  that  Jesus,  (whether  as  man  or 
God,  let  the  Editor  decide,)  declared  great  aver- 
sion to  death,  yet  yielded  to  it  in  common  with  many 
other  prophets,  knowing  that  the  will  of  his  Father 
rendered  such  death  unavoidable.  Matthew  xxvi. 
37 — 39,  42: — "And  he  took  with  him  Peter 
and  the  two  sons  of  Zobedec.  and    bcuan   to  be  ?or- 


\ 


I 


i 


t 


i 


I 


rovvful  and  very  heavy.  Then  saitli  he  unto  theiia, 
My  soul  is  exceeding  sorrowful^  even  unto  death.  And 
prayed,  saying,  O  my  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let 
this  cup"  (meaning  death)  "  pass  from  me;  neverthe- 
less, not  as  I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt.  He  went  away 
again  the  second  time,  and  prayed,  saying,  O  my 
Father,  if  this  cup  may  not  pass  away  from  me,  ex- 
cept I  drink  it,  thy  will  be  done."  Mark  xiv.  .36 : 
"And  he  said,  Abba  Father,  all  things  are  possible 
unto  thee;  takeaway  this  cup  from  me:  neverthe- 
less, not  what  I  will,  but  what  thou  wilt."  Luke 
xxii.  42,  44  :  "  Saying,  Father,  if  thou  be  willing, 
remove  this  cup  from  me  :  nevertheless,  not  my 
will,  but  thine  be  done.  And  being  in  an  agony,  he 
prayed  more  earnestly ;  and  his  sweat  was  as  it 
Avere  great  drops  of  blood  falling  down  to  \\\i^. 
ground." 

Now,  let  the  Editor  find  out  a  set  of  verses,  or 
even  a  single  passage,  w  liich  may  evince  that  Jesus, 
so  far  from  feeling  aversion  to  death,  delighted  in  it, 
as  he  has  attempted  to  prove  ;  and  let  him  take 
upon  himself  to  reconcile  such  gross  contradictions 
between  those  two  sets  of  passages,  (if  there  be 
any  such,)  or  reject  one  set  of  them. 

The  third  conclusion  of  the  Editor,  from  the 
above  Psalm,  and  the  compared  passage  of  Hebrews, 
is,  that  "  they  furnish  a  complete  answer  to  the 
declaration,  (page  206)  that  it  would  be  a  piece  of 
gross  iniquity  to  afflict  one  innocent  being,  who  had 
all  the  human  feelings,  and  who  had  never  trans- 
gressed the  will  of  God,  with  the  death  of  the  cross 
for  the  crimes  committed  by  others,  and  (page  207) 


ii 


& 


'/ 


j2 

(hat  the   iiii(|uitj  of  one's  being  sentenced  to  death, 
as  an  atonement  for  a  fault  committed  by  another,  is 
such,  tliat  every  just  man  would  shudder  at  the  idea 
of  one's  being  put  to  death  for  a  crime  committed  by 
another,  even   if  the    innocent    man  should  willingly 
olTer  his  life  in  behalf  of  that  other."     The  Editor 
then  maintains,  that  the  texts  quoted  (Psalms  and  He- 
brews) refute  the  above  positions,  stating,  that  ''this 
iniquity,  if  it    be  such,   the    Father  willed,  since  he 
prepared  the  Son  a  body,  in  which  to  suffer  this  pal- 
pable injustice.*'     In   this   I   perfectly  coincide  with 
the   Editor,  that  the  death   of   the   innocent   Jesus 
took  place,  like  that  of  many  preceding  prophets,  by 
the  unsearchable  will   of  God,   who  hath  ordained 
that  all  the  sons  of   men  shall  die,  some  by  a  violent 
and  painful  death,  others  by  an  easy  and  natural  ex- 
tinction; nor  do  I  require   the  evidence  of   the  text 
quoted,  (*'  Thou  hast  prepared  me  a  body,'')  to  con- 
vince me  of  the  fact,  declared  by  Jesus  in  his  agony 
in  the  garden,  that  his  sufferings,  in  particular,  were, 
like  those  of  mankind  in  general,  conformable  to  the 
will  of  God.     But    1   cannot  fmd   any  thing  in  these 
words  that  warrants  an  inference  so  contrary  to  our 
ideas  of  justice,  as,   that  the  pain  thus  suffered  by 
Jesus  was  inflicted  on  him,  though  innocent,  by  God, 
as  an  atonement  to  himself  for  withholding  merited 
punishment  from   the    truly  guilty.     And  this  is  the 
real  point  in  discussion.     The  Editor  will  admit  that 
the  ways  of  God,   in  bestowing   happiness  on  some, 
and  leaving  others,   in  our  eyes   more  worthy  of  di- 
vine favor,  to  wretchedness  and  misery,  aro  inscruta- 
ble; yet,  on  the   bare  fact,  that  the  innocent  Jesus 


\ 


W\ 


was  ordained  to  die  on  the  cross,  he  pretends  to  rest 
the  conclusion,   as   the  only  possible    one,   that   this 
death  he  suffered  to  satisfy  the  justice  of  his  Maker. 
Was  it  for  this  that  John  the  Baptist  was  beheaded? 
Was  it  for  this  that Zechariah  was  slain?    Was  it  as 
an  atonement  for   the  sins  of   the   rest  of  mankind, 
that  Jerusalem  was  suffered  to  "  stone  the  prophets, 
and  kill  those  w ho  were  sent  to  her"  ?     The  Editor 
will  not  admit   that  it  w^as;  yet  the  proposed   infer- 
ence from  the   bare  fact  would  be  as  legitimate  in 
these   cases   as  that   of  Jesus.      The  plain  and   ob- 
vious conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  the  text  is,  that 
God  prepared  for  Christ  a  body,  that  he  might  com- 
municate a   perfect  code  of  divine  law  to  mankind, 
and  that  he  loved   him  for  the  devotion  with  which 
he  fulfilled  his  divine  commission,  regardless  of  the 
comfort  or  safety  of  that  body,  and  his  readiness  to 
lay    it    down   when    it    suited  the   purpose    of    tlic 
Maker. 

The  llev.  Editor  expresses  his  indignation  at  the 
mode  of  reasoning  adopted  by  me,  in  the  passages 
above  quoted ;  saying,  "  Should  not  a  creature,  a 
worm  of  the  dust,  who  cannot  fully  comprehend  the 
mysteries  of  his  own  being,  pause  before  he  arraign 
his  Maker  of  gross  injustice,  and  charge  him  with 
having  founded  all  religion  on  an  act  of  palpable  ini- 
quity?" (page  529.) 

There  apjxiars  here  a  most  strange  mistake  on  the 
part  of  the  Editor.  It  is  he  who  seems  to  me  to  be 
laboring  to  prove  the  absurdity  that  God,  the  Al- 
mighty and  all-merciful,  is  capable  of  a  palpable  ini- 
quity— determined  to  have   punishment,  though  he 


'  r 


,  » 


\  ,11 


'? 


54 

leave  quite  unpunished  ;  inflicting  the  marks  of  iiis 
wrath  on  the  innocentyor  the  purpose  of  sparing  those 
who  justly  deserve  the  weight  of  its  terrors.  If  he 
mean  to  object  to  the  rashness  of  applying  the  lim- 
ited capacity  of  the  human  understanding  to  judge 
the  unsearchable  things  of  the  wisdom  of  God,  and 
therefore  denies  my  riglit,  as  a  worm  of  the  dust,  to 
deduce  any  thing  from  human  ideas  inimical  to  his 
view  of  the  divine  will,  I  can  only  say,  that  1  have 
for  my  example  that  of  a  fellow-worm,  in  his  own 
argument  to  shew  the  necessity  that  the  Almighty 
labored  under  to  have  his  justice  satisfied.  For  1 
find  this  very  Editor,  in  his  endeavor  to  prove  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement,  arguing  (})age  TjOG,)  thus  : 
"He  who  has  kept  the  law  has  not  broken  it,  and  he 
who  has  broken  it  cannot  have  kept  it :  that  the 
same  man,  therefore,  should  incur  its  penalty  for  vi- 
olating it,  and  also  deserve  its  reward  for  keeping  it, 
is  an  outrage  on  common  soise.*'*  ''This  will  clearly 
appear,  if  we  refer  to  human  laws,  imperfect  as  they 
are."  "Apply  this  to  the  divine  law."  "For  him, 
therefore,  to  be  rewarded  as  one  who  had  kept  the 
divine  law,  would  be  directly  contrary  to  righteous- 
ness." "  Human  judges  inquire  not  [about  the]  re- 
pentance of  the  robber  or  nmrderer,  but  respecting 

his  guilt." 

From  these  passages  does  it  not  appear  as  if  the 
Editor  were  of  opinion  that  it  is  quite  right  and 
proper  to  apply  human  reason  as  a  standard,  by 
which  to  judge  what  must  be  the  will  of  God,  when 
he  thinks  it  supports  his  views  of  the  ways  of  Prov- 
idence ;  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  it  is5  blasphemous 


)5 


55 


and  rebellious  against  the  divine  majesty,  to  deduce 
from  human  reason  conclusions  from  the  scriptures 
contrary  to  his  interpretations  of  them?  The  Edi- 
tor has  not  attempted  to  dispute  that,  applied  to  hu- 
man affairs,  the  motive  to  which  he  assigns  the  will 
of  God,  in  ordaining  the  death  of  Jesus  on  the  cross, 
would  be  palpably  iniquitous.  Should  not  this  induce 
him  to  pause,  and  |^ermit  nothing  but  the  most  ex- 
press and  positive  declaration,  couched  in  language 
not  ca{)able  of  being  explained  in  a  metaphorical 
sense,  to  sway  him  to  a  belief  so  irreconcilable  to 
common  sense  ?  Yet  he  is  willing  to  assume,  at  once, 
this  conclusion,  on  the  bare  fact  that  Jesus  was  pro- 
vided with  a  body. 

Do  not  orthodox  divines  often  offer  it  as  a  reason 
for  the  necessity  of  an  atonement  being  made  for  the 
crimes  of  men,  that  it  would  be   inequitable,  in  the 
perfect  nature  of  the  just  God,  to  remit  sin  without 
some  sort  of  punishment  being  inllicted  for  it  as  a 
satisfaction  to  his  justice  ?     Do  they  not,  in  conse- 
quence, represent  the  death  of  Jesus  as  an  atonement 
for  the  sins  of  mankind?  If  they  do,  and  are  allow- 
ed to  do  so,  I  think  myself  also  authorized  to  urge, 
in  reference  to   human  notions  of  justice,  that  "it 
would  be  a  piece  of  gross  iniquity  to  afflict  one  inno- 
cent being,  who  had  all  the  human  feelings,  and  who 
had  never  transgressed   the    will  of  God,  with   the 
death  of  the  cross,  for  crimes  committed  by  others, 
especially  when  he  declares  such  great  aversion  to 
it."      But  if  the  Editor  abandon  this  mode  of  reason- 
ing, and  confess  the  unsearchable,  inscrutable  nature 
both  of  divine  justice  and  divine  mercy,  I  am  pcrfcct- 
Iv  rcadv  and   willing:  to  do  the  same. 


f 
I' 


,     r 


5(i 

Tlie  Editor  now  refers  to  the  prophets,  (page 
,033,)  saying,  that  Isaiah,  in  eh.  vii.  "  predicting  the 
birth  of  Christ,  identifies  his  divine  and  ins  human 
nature."  As  Isaiah  vii.  14,  and  ix.  6,  have  no  rela- 
tion whatever  to  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  I  deem 
it  proper  to  defer  the  notice  of  them  to  the  subse- 
quent chapter  on  the  Trinity. 

The  Editor,  in  his  next  quotation  from  Isaiah,  first 
introduces  ch.     xi.  [3],  "  And  lie   shall   make  him'^ 
(Jesus)  "of  quick  understanding  in  the  fear  of  the 
Lord  ;"  but  my  h'mited  capacity  has  failed  to  enable 
me  to  ascertain  w  hat  he  really  means  to  establish  by 
the  quotation  of    this  passage,  (page    536.)     The 
Editor  was    in  the  course  of  an   attempt  to  prove 
the  deity  and  the  atonement  of    Jesus  Christ,  but 
the  force  of  truth    would    appear  to    have  induced 
him  here   to  cite   a  verse   which,    containing   such 
phrases  as — "Make  him   of   quick    understanding," 
and  "  In  the  fear  of  the  Lord,"  go  to  prove  his  cre- 
ated nature.     In  like  manner  1  must  confess  my  ina- 
bility to  discover  any  allusion  whatever  to  the  atone- 
ment, in  his  next  quotation  from  Isaiah  xix.  19,  20. 

The  Editor  having  endeavored,  in  his  former  Re- 
view, to  prove  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  from 
the  application  of  the  term  "  Saviour"  to  Jesus,  I 
noted,  in  my  Second  Appeal,  that  "we  find  the  title 
Saviour  applied  frequently  in  the  divine  writings  to 
those  who  have  been  endued  with  the  power  of  sav- 
ing nations,  whether  in  a  spiritual  sense,  by  the  im- 
parting of  the  divine  will,  or  by  affording  temporary 
protection  to  them  ;  although  none  of  those  saving 
prophets   or   princes   atoned   for    the   sins    of   their 


\ 


5/ 


t 


y 


\ 


fellow-creatures  by  their  death;"  (page  208 ;)  and  that 
"all  those  who  have  been  instrumental  in  ciFccting  the 
doJiverance  of  their  fellow-rrcatures,  from  evils  of 
whatever  nature,  were  ciqjendent  themselves  upon 
God,   and  only  instruments  in  his  liand."     The  Edi- 
tor, though  unable  to  deny  this  fact,  thus  turns  away 
the  subject;  saying,  "It   surely   required   but  little 
knowledge  to  discern,   that   a  man's  delivering  his 
country  does  not  elevate    liim  to   an  equality  with 
God.    or,    that    to  overcome    an    invading    enemy 
is    an    act    totally    dillbrent    from     saving    sinners 
from  their  sini."     But    the  force    of   truth    again 
makes    the    Rev.   Editor    quote    here    the    follow- 
ing passage,   («  and  he  shall  send  them  a  Saviour,  and 
a  great   one,   and  he   shall    deliver  them,")  which 
docs  not   only  refute  his  own  position,  but   proves 
what  I  advanced  in  my  Second  Appeal ;  that  is,   as 
Christ  and   others,   who  saved   people  at  difTerent 
times   in    their  capacities,    were    dependent   them- 
selves   upon   God,     and    only    instruments    in    his 
hands  ;  ,s  ,t  not  possible   for  God,  who  could  raise,     , 
as  the  E<l.tor  confesses,  personages  to  save  men,  by 
thc.r  miraculous  strength,  from  the  grasp  of  their 
enemies,    to    raise   one   to   save   mankind    from   sin 
tlirough  Ins  divine  instructions  ?     if  „of,  how  should 
we  reconcile  such  disavowal  of  the  power  of  God  to 
the  following  assertion   of  the  evangelist  Matthew 
that  the  people  "  glorified  God,  who  had  given  such 
power  to  men"  ?  (ix.  8.)     And  if  Jesus  was  not  enti- 
tled to  the  appellation  of  a  Saviour  from  the  savin<. 
I^owcr  of  his  divine  instructions,  in  what  sense  should 
we  understand  those  declarations  of  Jesus  himself 


t 


t 


•Nu 


to  be  found   even   in  a   single  gos|)el  ? — John  v.  24., 

yi.  63,  XV.  3. 

To  Ins  question,  "  When,  previously  to  Christ's 
comin",  did  the  Egyptians  cry  to  Jehovah  for  dehv- 
erance,  and  when,  previously,  was  Israel  the  third 
with  Egypt  and  the  Assyrians  ?"  my  answer  must 
be  in  the  negative  ;  that  is,  neither  previous  to 
Christ's  coming  did  the  Egyptians  cry  to  Jehovah 
and  join  the  Assyrians  and  Israel,  a  blessing  in  the 
midst  of  the  land,  nor  have  they  subsequently  to  tiie 
coming  of  Jesus,  up  to  this  day,  cried  to  the  God  of 
Israel,  or  joined  Israel  and  tiic  Assyrians  in  asking   a 

divine  blessing. 

The  Editor  says  page  (537,)  that  '*  in  ch.  xxxv. 
the  blessings  of  Christ's  kingdom  are  declared  in 
the  most  glowing  language."  1  do  not  dispute  it 
in  the  least.  If  verse  10  ("the  ransomed  of  the 
Lord  shall  return,"  kc.)  have  any  allusion  to  Jesus,  it 
must  have  reference  to  his  implicit  obedience  to  the 
will  of  Jehovah,  even  to  the  laying  down  of  his  own 
hfe  for  the  safety  of  mankind  ;  as  explained  in  my 
Second  Appeal,  pp.  201,  202.  Any  one  who  has  a 
tolerable  knowledge  of  the  idiom  of  Hebrew  or 
Arabic,  or  even  Persian,  must  be  aware  that  the 
word  "  ransom"  DV")£3  or  ^  is  x)ften  used  to  ex- 
press extreme  attachment  or  obedience,  without  im- 
plying an  actual  sacrifice  as  an  atonement  for  sins. 

He  again  quotes  Isaiah  xlii.  [2,]  21,  "He  shall  not 
cry,"  <Scc.  "The  Lord  is  well  pleased  for  his  right- 
eousness' sake  ;"  but  I  am  unable,  also,  to  discover 
what  these  quotations  have  to  do  with  Christ's  aton- 
ing for  sin  as  a  sacrifice  in  lieu  of  goats  and  bullocks. 


1 

I 


59 


So,  2  Corinthians  v.  21,  "  For  he  hath  made  him  to 
be  sin,"  &c.  has  no  reference  to  the  atonement, 
whicli  thf^  Editor  insists  upon  :  it  implies  no  more 
than  that  "God  hath  made  him  subject  to  suffer- 
ings and  death,  the  usual  punishment  and  conse- 
quence of  sin,  as  if  he  had  been  a  sinner,  though  he 
were  guilty  of  no  sin  ;  that  we,  in  and  by  him,  might 
be  made  righteous,  by  a  righteousness  imputed  to  us 
by  God."     See  Locke's  works,  Vol.  VIH.  page  232. 

The  Rev.  Editor  now  refers  to  ch.  liii.  of  Isa- 
iah, laying  great  stress  upon  such  phrases  as  the  fol- 
lowing, found  in  that  chapter  :  "  Surely  he  hatli 
borne  our  griefs  and  carried  our  sorrows;"  "  He  was 
wounded  for  our  trans«:ressions  ;"  "  The  Lord  hath 
laid  on  him  the  iniquities  of  us  all;"  "  He  shall  bear 
their  iniquities."  Do  these  sentences  prove  that  he, 
like  a  sacrificial  "  lamb"  or  "sheep,"  atoned  for  the 
sins  of  others  ?  Did  ever  a  sacrificial,  lamb  or  goat 
bear  the  iniquities  of  men?  The  scape-goats  arc 
stated  to  have  borne  the  iniquities  of  Israel — a  cir- 
cumstance far  from  being  applicable  to  Christ,  even 
typically  ;  for  he,  as  w'as  predicted,  made  no  escape 
from  the  hands  of  his  enemies.  My  readers  may 
peruse  the  whole  of  ch.  liii.  and  may  find  that  it  con- 
veys but  the  idea  that  Jesus,  as  a  prince,  though  in- 
nocent himself,  was  to  suffer  afflictions,  or  rather 
death,  for  the  transgressions  of  his  guilty  people, 
while  interceding  for  them  with  a  king  mightier  than 
himself. 

To  this  question  of  the  Editor,  "Is  not  our  repent- 
ance suflicient  to  make  atonement  with  the  all-mer- 
ciful ?"     mv  answer  nmst  be  in  the  affirmative,  since 


*-*-. 


ii- 


I' 


60 

^Tc  find  the  direct  aiitliority  of  (he  niithor  of  tlii^  re- 
ligion,  and  his  forerunner,  John  the  Baptist,  requirin:^ 
us  to  have  recourse  to  repentance  as  the  means  of 
procuring  pardon  for  sin.  (Vide  page  24.)  Had  the 
human  race  never  transgressed,  or  had  they  repent- 
ed sincerely  of  their  transgressions,  (he  Son  of  Cod 
need  not  have  been  sent  to  teach  them  rej)entancc 
for  the  pardon  of  their  sins,  to  hiy  before  them  tlie 
divine  law,  calculated  to  prevent  their  further  trans- 
gressions, the  fullilinent  of  which  commission  was  at 
the  cost  of  his  life. 

As  I  have  already  noticed  (in  page  54  et  seq. 
Final  Appeal)  the  Editors  reference  to  human  ideas 
of  justice  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  atonement, 
and  his  censuring  me  for  the  same  mode  of  reference 
to  natural  equity,  1  will  not  renew  the  subject 
here. 

The  Editor  seems  contented  with  the  quotation 
of  only  two  passages  of  Jeremiah,  viz.  ch.  xxiii.  [5,] 
"Behold,  the  davs  come,  saith  Jehovah,  that  I  will 
raise  unto  David  a  righteous  branch,"  Ln.  and  ch. 
xxxi.  [31,  33,]  as  being  quoted  in  Hcb.  viii.  [8,  10,] 
"  Behold,  the  davs  come,  saith  the  Lord,  when  1  will 
make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel  and 
the  land  of  Judah.  I  will  put  my  law  in  their  in- 
ward parts,"  kc.  The  E<litor  then  quotes  (page 
539)  1  Cor.  i.  ,30,  "  Christ  is  made  unto  us  wisdom, 
righteousness,  sanctification,  and  redemption."  But 
what  tliese  quotations  have  to  do  with  the  vicarious 
sacrifice  of  Christ,  I  am  again  at  a  loss  to  perceive  ; 
being  able  to  discover  in  them  nothing  more  than  a 
prophecy  and   its  fulfilment,   that  Christ  was  to  be 


; 


) 


1)1 

.ent  to  direct  mankind  to  sincerity  in  worship,  right- 
eousness in  conduct,  sanctification  in  purity  of  mind, 
and  salvation  by  repentance. 

The    Editor   then   advances,  that    "  Ezekiel    also 
predicts    the    promised    Redeemer  in  ch.  xxxiv.  23. 
He  says,   'J   will    set  up  one  shepherd  over  them, 
and    he   shall    feed  them,  even   my  servant  David  ; 
and  he  shall  be  their   sheplierd.'"     I  never  denied, 
in  any  of  my  publications,  that  Jesus  was  sent  as  the 
promised  Messiah,    nor    did    I    ever    interpret    the 
above    |)assages,   as   some  Jewish  writers,   that  the 
Messiah  would  be  not  only  of  the  race  of  David,  but 
also  of  his  spirit.     How  is  it,  then,  that    the  Editor 
thinks   it  necessary  to  attempt  so  often  to  prove  the 
kingdom   and   redemption  of  Jesus  as  the  promised 
Messiah  in  the  course  of   his   arguments   in  favor  of 
the   atonement?    He   afterwards   quotes  Daniel  ix. 
2^>. — "  Shall  Messiah  be  cut  o(f,  but  not  for  himself." 
There  is  no  term  in  the  original  H-brew  passage  an- 
swering to  the  words  "  bur  or  "  himsf>lf:'  found  in  the 
English    version.     We  find  in  the  Hebrew,  ij  y^X 
"No  person  or  nothing  for  him;"    that   is,  "Shall 
Messiah   be   cut   ofi',   and  no  one  be  for  him."     The 
translators  used  the  term   "  but,"   instead  of  '^  and," 
as  in  the  Hc])iew,  and  the  term  "himself,"  in  lieu  of 
''him."      In  illustration   I    shall    here    cite   the  same 
phrase  found   in  other  instances,  both  in  the  ori-inal 
Hebrew  Scriptures  and  their  translation  also,  in  the 
English  version.     Exodus  xxii.  2,  D\tD1  "i^  f%V,  «  No 
blood  [be  shed]  for  him."    Numbers  xxvii.  4,  ID  )^  pj^, 
"He   hath    no   son."     Psalm   Ixxii.    12,  1^  n?;^  pxi, 
"And    him   that    hath  no  helper."     Daniel  xi.   45, 


m 


V I 


N 


f 

r 

I 


62 

^b  nrU*  ('N1'  "And  none  shall  hel|)  liim."     But,  even 
were    we   to  admit   this  mistranslation  or  perversion 
of  the   ori^rinal  Scriptures,    the    words,    "Shall    the    ^ 
Messiah   be  cut  off,   but  not   for  himself,"  would,  to    * 
my  mind,  convey  nothing  more  than  that  the  Messiah 
should   be  cut   off,   not  for  any  guilt  lie  committed 
himself,  but  by  the  fault  of  his  subjects,  who  contin- 
ed  to  rebel  against  the  divine  law,  though  instnicted 
by  their  intercessor,   even  at  the  hazard  of  his  own 
life. 

The   Editor  quotes  Hosea   iii.   [5,]   "After  that, 
[afterward  shall]   the   children  of   Israel  return  and 
seek  the  Lord  their  God,  and    David    their  King," 
kc,  and  Joel  ii.  28,  "  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  after-    $ 
ward,  that  I  will   pour  out    my  spirit  upon  all  flesh.    ; 
and  your  sons  and   your  daughters  shall    prophesy,''    \ 
kc  ;  and  also  Amos  ix.  [11,]"  In  that  day  will  I  raise 
up  the   tabernacle    of   David    which    is  fallen,"  cV:c. 
Had  he  been  pleased  to  shew  the  tendency  of  these 
quotations  to  the  proof  of  the  vicarious   sacrifice  of    i 
Jesus,   1  would   endeavor   to  examine   the  connexion    f 
between  them  :   as  he  has  omitted  to  do  so,  and  their 
relation  to  the  question  is   certainly  not  obvious,  I 
must  spare  myself  the  trouble. 

The  Rev.  Editor  says  (page  511,)"  nor  does  Oba- 
diah,  in  his  short  prophecy,  wholly  omit  the  Redeem- 
er's kingdom.  He  alludes  thereto  in  verse  21: 
"•  And  saviours,  shall  come  upon  mount  Zion  to  judge 
the  mount  of  Esau;  and  the  kingdom  shall  be  Jeho- 
vahV"  To  justify  the  application  to  Jesus  of  the 
noun  "saviours,"  though  found  in  the  plural  form, 
he  thus  argues:  "should  he"  (the  author  of  the  Aiv 


63 

peals)  "  reply,  that  as  the  plural  number  'saviours'  is 
used,  this  cannot  refer  to  Christ ;  we  ask  him  wheth- 
er lie  has  not  (page  242)  affirmed,  that  '  the  plural 
form  is  often  used  in  a  singular  sense,  as  of  his  mas- 
ters, meaning  his  master  has  given  him  a  wife'"? 

The  Editor,  as  a  diligent  student  of  the  Scriptures, 
should  have  known  that  the  noun  in  question,  "  sa- 
viours" being  accompanied  with  the  plural  verb  ^by^, 
"they  shall  come  up,"  is  by  no  means  an  ar^alogous 
case  to  that  of  the  term  "  Masters,"  as  found  in  Ex- 
odus xxi.  4,  which  is  connected  with  the  verb  singu- 
lar \n\  whereas,  in  Neh.  ix.  27,  the  term  "saviours" 
is  associated  with  the  verb  in  the  plural  form  and 
the  past  tense,  as  well  as  with  the  pronoun  plural. 

I    must,    therefore,    maintain    the    correctness    of 
reading  "  saviours"   in  Obadiah  as  required  in  the 
former  alternative  of  the  question  put  by  the  Editor, 
(page  .^)41,  line  34,)  finding  myself  unable  to   "  ac-' 
knowledge  the   triune  God,"  as  proposed   by  him  in 
the  latter  alternative  :  for  having  relinquished  the 
notion  of   the   triune,  quadrune,  and  decimune  gods, 
which  I  once  professed,  when  immersed  in  the  gross- 
er polytheism  prevailing   among  modern  Hindoos,  1 
cannot  reconcile  it  to  my  understanding  to  find  plaus- 
ibility in  one  case,  while  the  same  notion  is  of  ac- 
knowledged absurdity   in  another.     The  Editor  ad- 
mits (page  536)  the  application  of  the  term  Saviour 
to  human  individuals,  as  pointed  out  by  me,  (Second 
Appeal,  pp.  289,  290,)  yet  he  is  anxious  to  prove  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement  by  the  application  of  that 
very  term  to  Jesus. 

The  Editor  says,  (page  542)  that   -  Micah,  in  ch. 


-I 


.  u 


64 

iv.  de.crjl.e.  Cluist's  kingdom   nearly  „.   the   ,a„,„ 
terms  wuh  Isaiah,  and  in  ch.  v.  he  rLJZ    T 

l.ce  shall    he  come   forth   unto  me_whose  goings 
forth  l,ave  been  of  old,  from  everlasting.'    Tife  tel 
tnnony  to  the   eternal  deity  of  Christ,  Len  in  co, ' 

look         Any    testm.ony    rela.ing    ,o     the    birth    of 
Jesus,   havmg  noth.ng  to  do  with    his   atonement,. 

.   cited  ».  the  subse.inent  part  of  this  discussion,  when 
we  come  to  the  subject  of  the  Trinity 

He  quotes  again  Nahum  i.  15,  for  the  purpose  of 
Fovmg  Chnst's  kingdom,  which  is  a  subject'total , 

Jrlabakkuk  (snys  the  Editor,  page  542)  "  was  evi- 
dently no  s  ranger  to  the  doctrine  founded  on  tho 
atonement-  and  he  then  c.uotes  the  passage,  -fhe 
just  shal   hve  by  his  faith,"  as  corroborated  bv  Paul 

»hall  be  hllcd  with  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah  "'  ^c 
But  what  faith  in,  and  knowledge  of  God,  as  well  a.^ 
faith  m  the  perfection  of  his  attributes,  and  in  the 
prophets  sent  by  him,  has  to  do  with  the  atonement, 
I  am  at  a  loss  to  discover.  Does  the  bare  mention 
o  aith  by  Habakkuk,  or  other  p  ophets,  prove  his 
or  their   familiarity    with    the    sacrificial    death    of 

t'CSllS  f 

He  quotes  the  passage  of  Ilaggai  ii.  [6,  7,  9.] 
•  lius  saith  Jehovah  ;_The  desire  of  all  nation^ 
.hall  come,  and  [I]  will  f,||  this  house  with  glory.- 
The  glory  of  this  latter  hou.e  shall  be  greater  than 


(if) 

'I'at  of  the  former,  saith  Jehovah  of  hosfs,"_which 

I'o    Editor  thinks  aliords  decided   proof  respecting 

both  the  atonement  and  the  deity  of  Christ      It  is 

-owever    too  deep  for  my  shallow  understanding  to 

.  -scover    rom   this    passage  an    allusion    to  either  of 

.ese  doctrines,  much  less  that  it  is  a  decided  proof  of 

I"''i..      T"'  '"  ""^'""''"^  '^>  '^'^  word  "tem- 
ple,    u    both  ..stances  m   the  verse,  a  r>.a,en„l  one, 

"I'-l  .Us  evident,  from  its  context  m  the  prophecy 
vas  alone  in  the  contemplation  of  Ilaggai,   we  mu  t 
I'c  persuaded  to  believe  that  the  latt<;:■^emple      a 
".ore  magnificently  built  by  Zerubbabel  and  Josh  la 
;..t   e  ,OariuMl.an  the  former  ^^ 

by  the  la    er  term  m  the  above,  it  would  be  regard- 
ed naturally  superior  to  a  n.utenal  one,  without  the 

necessity  of  "Jebninl.'c:  o •       •.     •    '   """""t  ">e 

nature."  "^  ""°  "  ^'""^*^''  "'  o"'' 

He  quotes  Zech.  iii.  8,  9,  and  vi    1-7    ij       i        ■ 
(here  Ik  ..^.  .1       it  '   '*'   wherein 

'<'c  c    s  not  the  slightest  mention  of  the  atonement 
f^  to  h,s  attomp,  to  prove  the  d..i,v  of  Jes^s  f "  i 

tor       The  01?;'    f     T'\  "  '"  "  ^"''^-'I'-ent  clia,> 
'•      i  he  phrase  found  m  the  verse  ("  I  will  remove 
"e  '""pnty  of  that  land  in  one  day")  doe  It  "t 
'-  e  the  removal  of  tho   miqmties'o/  t he  ,::|'  Tl 

'•ael  to  the  sacrificial  death  of   L.c 

#1.     ci-        ■  ueain  ol   Jesus,  so  as  to   JnsiiY, 


!  >. 


I 


» 


\ 


.._  '   '/ 


Yi 


0(3 

conduct  in  their  violent  persecution  of  Christians. — 
So  the  Jews  have  been  punislicd  to  this  day,  as 
Christians  beheve,  on  account  of  their  outrages  upon 
the  body  of  Jesus,  and  their  disobedience  to  him. — 
The  remaining  passage  of  Zech.  (pp.  543 — 548.)  and 
verse  1st  of  ch.  iii.  of  Malachi,  (page  .548,)  quoted 
by  the  Editor  in  support  of  the  deity  of  Jesus,  1  will 
notice  afterwards. 

I  am  sorry  1  cannot   agree  with   the   Editor  in  his 
assertion,  (page  549,)  that  "  had  our  Lord   himself 
made  no  direct  declaration  respecting  the  design   of 
his    death,   his   referring    his   disciples  to  those  pre- 
dictions already  named,  would    have   been  sufficient, 
particularly  in  their  circumstances ;"  for  it  would  bo 
strange   to  suppose   that  Jesus  should  have  omitted 
to  inculcate  so  important  a  doctrine,  and  so  funda- 
mental for  salvation,  (according  to  the  Editor,)  both 
before  and  after  his  resurrection,  while   he   was  con- 
stantly enjoining  love   to  God,  to  neighbors,  and  to 
each  other,  and  also  repentance,  in  case  of  failure  in 
obedience.     How  is  it  possible  to  think,  unless  biass- 
ed by  early  prejudices,  that  a  teacher,  a  truly  divine 
teacher,  who,  by  declaring  himself  publicly  the  son 
of  God*  and   the   king  of  the  Jews,*  as   predicted, 
brought  death  upon  himself,  should  have  kept  con- 
cealed the  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  if  such  were 
the  main  source  of  salvation,  from  his  own  apostles. 
even    after  his  resurrection,  and   have  left  them  to 
deduce  so  material  a  point  from  the  obscure  predic- 
tions of  the   prophets,   wliich   are  susceptible  of  so 
many  different  interpretations*/^ 

-  John  xi\.  7.  12     * 


/ 


b/ 

The  Editor  then  affirms,  that  "'it  is  evident  that 
direct  intimations  of  his  nature   were  not  withheld: 
such  were,  his  declaring  to  them"  (his  apostles)  "that 
he  came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many — his  con- 
versing with  Moses  and  Elias,  (Luke  ix.  31,)  his  de- 
claring that  the  Son  of  Man  should  be  betrayed  into 
the  hands  of  men,  and  be   killed,  and  rise  affain  the 
third  day — that  he  was  about  to  give  liis  flesh  for 
the   life  of  the  world,  and   to  lay  down  his  life  for 
his  shee[j — and  his  discourse  with  them,  'This  is  mv 
body,  which  is  broken  for  you  ;'  '  This  is  my  blood 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  many  for 
the  remission  of  sins  ;'  '  Thus  it  is  written,  and  thus  it 
behoved  Christ  to  suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead 
the  third  day.' "     As  the  Rev.  Editor  quoted  some 
of  these  verses  in  his  former  Review,  I  noticed  them 
in   the   Second   Appeal    (pp.    201 — 203.)       Entire- 
ly  overlooking   my    observations,   however,   he    has 
thought   proper  to   repeat    them    here,    with    some 
additions.     This  is   indeed    a  strange    mode   of  con- 
ducting a  controversy  ;   but  it  lays  me  under  the  ne- 
cessity of   again  adducing  my  remarks  in  the  Second 

Appeal  on  those  passages.     They  are  as  follows  : 

"  Do  these  passages  reasonably  convey  any  thinff 
^more  than  the  idea  that  Jesus  was  invested  with  a  di- 
vine commission  to  deliver  instructions  leadino-  to  eter- 
nal beatitude,  wliich  whosoever  should  receive  should 
live  forever?  And  that  the  Saviour,  foreseeing  that 
the  imparting  of  those  instructions  would,  by  excitino- 
the  anger  and  enmity  of  the  superstitious  Jews, 
cause  his  life  to  be  destroyed,  yet  hesitated  not  to 
persevere  in   their  promulgation :  as  if  a  king,  who 


A 


X. 


/ 


>•' 


/ 


6H 

hazards  his  hfe    to  proriire    freedom   and    peace  for 
his  subjects,  were  to  address  himself  to  them,  sajintr, 
•  I   lay  down  my  hfe  for  you.'     This  interpretation 
is  fully  confirmed  by  the  foIlowin<(,  [passacres.]   Luk« 
iv.  43:  'And  he  said  unto  them,  1  must  preach    the 
kino^dom  of  God   to  other  cities  also;  for  therefore 
am  I  sent.'    Ch.  ii.  47— 49  :  '  And  all  that  heard  him 
were    astonished  at   his   understanding  and  answers. 
And   when  they'  (his  parents)  'saw  him,  they  were 
amazed:  and   his  mother  said    unto   him,  Son,  why 
hast  thou   thus  dealt   with  us  ?    Behold,  thy  father 
and  I   have    sought    thee  sorrouirjir.      And    he   said 
unto  them.  How  is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ?  w  ist  ye  not 
that  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business?'   Where- 
in Jesus  declares,  that   the   sole   object  of  his  com- 
mission was  to  preach  and  impart  divine  instructions 
Again,  he   instructed  his  disciples   in  the  divine    law 
and  will,  as  appears  from  the  followint*-  text:  "  For  I 
have  given   unto  them  the  words  which  thou  gavest 
me;  and  they  have  received  them,  and  have  known 
surely  that   I  came    out   from    thee,  and  they  have 
believed  that   thou    didst  send  me.'     (John  xvii.  8.) 
Jesus,   in   communing   with  God,    manifests    that  he 
had  completed   the  object  of  his  commission  by  im- 
parting divine  commandments  to  mankind.     'I  have 
glorified  thee  in    [on]  the  earth,   /  have  finished   the 
work  which  thou  gavest  me  to  do.'     Had  his  death 
on    the  crubs  been    the  work,  or  part   of  the  work, 
for   the   performance  of   which  Jesus  came  into  thi> 
world,  he,  as  the  founder  of  truth,  would  not  have 
declared  himself   to  have  Jinishcd  the  work   prior  to 
his  death/'— I  now  beg  that  the  Kditor  will  be  pleas- 


tjy 

^'il  to  reconcile  all  the  above  passages  to  his  position, 
that  the  death  of  Jesus    on    the   cross  was  the  sole 
object  of  his  appearance  in  this  world,  and    that  his 
precepts  were  a  mere  code    of  moralitv  inadequate 
to  procure  salvation.      Had  not  Jesus  disregarded  his 
hfe,  and  suflbred   his  blood  to  be  shed,  as  predicted 
m  the  delivery  of  the  will  of  the  Father,  the  whole 
of  the  Jews  would  have  still  remained  sunk  in  super- 
stition, and  the  Gentiles  in  idolatry,  and  there  would 
iiave  been    no  perfect  security  for  the   remission  of 
siiiii  and  the    attainment  of  eternal  comfort  in  those 
sayings.     Hence  the   gracious   benefactor  alludes  to 
this  act  of  delivery  from  sins,  through  divine  instruc 
tions,  even  at  the  expense  of  his  own  life,  and  not  to 
an  actual  sacrificial  death  as  an  equal  value  or  com- 
pensation   for    the    sin    pardoned,    since    the    New 
Testament  declares  that  God  forgives  mankind  freely 
without   any  equivalent.      Romans   iii.   24,    "  Beino-' 
justified/re./^,  {^u^gaca, gratis)  by  his  grace,   through 
the   redemption   that   is   in  Jesus   Christ."     So  Ro- 
mans  viii.  32,  15,  16,  18,  confirms  the   idea  of  justifi- 
cation  by  the   free  grace  of  God.     For  the  further 
illustration  of  this  subject,  I  quote  the  paraphrase  on 
the  above  cited  verse,  (Rom.  iii.  24,)  by  Locke,  one 
of  the  greatest  men  that  ever  lived,  and  his  notes  on 
Its  diilerent  expressions.     Locke's  Works,  Vol.  VHT. 
p.  304,  Paraphrase  on   verses  24  and  25  :    "  Beino- 
made  righteous  gratis,  by  the  favor  of  God,  through 
the  redemption    which   is    by  Jesus   Christ;   whom 
God  hath  set  forth  to  be  the  propitiatory,  or  mercv- 
seat,   m  his  own  blood,  for  the  manifestation  of  Ins 
(God's)   righteousness,   by  parsing   over  their  trans- 


i 


^/ 


■^ 


A- 


70 

i(rcssions,  formerly  committed,  which  h('  hath  borr 
with  hitherto,  so  as  to  withhold  his  hand  from  cast- 
ing of!*  the  nation  of  the  Jews,  as  their  past  sins  de- 
served." 

Note  on  the  w  ord  Redemption,  verse  24  :  "  Re- 
demption  signifies   deliverance,   but  not  deliverance 
from  every  thing,  but  deliverance  from  that  to  which 
a  man  is  in  subjection  or  bondaofe.      Nor  does  re- 
demption  by   Jesus   Christ    import   there    was    anv 
compensation  made  to  God,  by  paying  what   was  of 
equal  value,  in  consideration  whereof  they  were  de- 
livered ;  for  that  is  inconsistent  with   what   St.    Paul 
expressly  says  here,  viz.  that  sinners  are  justified  b\ 
God  gratis,  and  of  his  free  bounty.      What   this  re- 
demption is,  St.  Paul  tells  us,  Eph.    i.   7,  Col.   i.    II. 
*even  the  forgiveness  of  sins.'      But  if  St.   Paul   had 
not  been  so  express  in  defining  what  he  means  b\ 
redemption,  they  yet  would  be   thougiit   to  lay   too 
much    stress   upon  the  criticism   of  a   word,    in    the 
translation,  who  would  thereby  force  from  the  word, 
in  the  original,  a  necessary  sense  which  it   is  plain  ii 
hath  not.     That  redeeming,  in  the  sacred  Scripture 
language,  signifies  not  precisely  paying  an  ecjuivaleiit. 
is  so  clear  that  nothing  can  be   more.     I  shall  refer 
my  reader  to  three  or  four  places  amongst   a  great 
number:   Exod.  vi.  6,  Deut.  vii.  8,  xv.    12,  and   xxiv- 
18.     But  if  any  one  will,  from  the  literal  siorniflcation 
of  the  word  in  English,  persist  in  it,  against  PaulV 
declarations,    that   it   necessarily  implies   an   e(juiva- 
lent  price  paid,  1  desire   him   to  consider  to  whom; 
and   that,  if  we   strictly  adhere  to  the  metaphor,  it 
must  be  to  those,  whom   the   redeemed  are   in  bon- 


\ 


I: 


71 


dage  to,  and  from  whom  we  are  redeemed,  viz.  Sin 
and  Satan.  If  he  will  not  believe  his  own  system  for 
this,  let  him  believe  St.  Paul's  words.  Tit.  ii.  14: — 
•  Who  gave  himself  for  us,  that  he  might  redeem 
us  from  all  iniquity.'  Nor  could  the  price  be  paid 
to  God,  in  strictness  of  justice,  (for  that  is  made  the 
argument  here,)  unless  the  same  person  ought,  by 
that  strict  justice,  to  have  both  the  thing  redeemed, 
and  the  price  paid  for  its  redemption;  for  it  is  to 
God  we  are  redeemed,  by  the  death  of  Christ. — 
Rev.  V.  9:  'Thou  wast  slain,  and  hast  redeemed  us 
to  God  by  thy  blood.'" 

Note  upon  the  word  mercy-seat,  verse  25  :  ''Iladrrr 
sffov  signifies  propitiatory,  or  mercy-seat,  and  not  pro- 
tiation,  as  Mr.  Mede  has  rightly  observed  upon  this 
place,  in  his  discourse  on  God's  house." 

The  Editor  fills  about  a  page  and  a  half  (a  part  of 
550  and  the  whole  of  551)  with  quotations  from  the 
writings  of  the  apostles,  to  substantiate  the  doctrine 
of   the  atonement,  beginning   with   Rom.   iii.  24,  al- 
ready quoted  by  me  ;   but  as  those   teachers  merely 
illustrated  the  sayings  of  their  gracious  Master,  their 
writings  must  be  understood  with  reference  only  to 
what  had  been   taught   by  him.     I   will,    therefore, 
not  prolong  the  present  subject  of  discussion  by  ex- 
amining those   passages   separately,  especially   as    ] 
have  already  noticed  some  of  them  in  the  course  of 
the  examination  of  the  Psalms  and  Prophets.     Being 
desirous  to  shew  that  my  interpretation  of  these  is 
fully  supported  by  scriptural   authorities,  I  will  only 
refer  to  a  few  texts  explanatory  of  the  terms  sacri- 
iice.  ransom,  oflering,  and   the   taking  awav  the  sins 


12 


A- 


of  the  world,  as  ascribed  to  Jesus,  liom.  v.  U); 
Heb.  ii.  17;  Eph.  v.  2;  Heb.  v.  1,  viii.  3,  jx.  14,  2'X 
26;  Tit.  ii.  12—14;  lleb.  xiii.  12;  Rev.  i.  fi ;  Eph. 
i.  7  ;  J.iikc  i.  77;  Matt.  xx.  28;  Mark  x.  45;  1  Tim. 
ii.  G. 

Now  1  beg  tbat  my  reader  will  be  pleased  to  de- 
lerniine  whetber  it  would  be  more  consistent  with 
the  context,  and  with  the  benevolent  spirit  of  the 
Christian  dispensation,  to  understand  such  words  lite- 
rally, and  thus  found  the  salvation  attainable  by 
Christianity,  upon  flesh  and  blood,  human  or  divine': 
or  whether  it  would  not  rather  be  thorouirhlv  rea 
sonable  and  scriptural,  as  well  as  consistent  with  tin 
religion  of  Jesus,  to  take  them  in  a  spiritual  sense  as 
explained  by  the  apostles  themselves. 

As  the  Editor's  illustrative  remarks  upon  the 
atonement  (pages  552  and  553)  rest  entirely  on  the 
arguments  previously  adduced,  I  will  leave  them  un- 
noticed, having  already  examined  those  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapters,  except  only  his  queries,  "  What 
shall  we  say  to  his  impugning"  (page  253)  -  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ's  divine  and  human  nature,  even  after 
having  acknowledged  it  in  chapter  the  second  ;  and 
to  his  ridiculing  his  intercession?"  <!v:c.  to  which  I 
must  rej)ly.  It  is  perfectly  optional  with  the  Editor 
to  say  for  or  against  any  one  whatever  his  conscience 
may  permit ;  nevertheless  I  shall,  from  the  dictates 
of  my  own  conscience,  reject  absolutely  such  unac- 
countable ideas  as  a  mixed  nature  of  God  and  man. 
as  maintained  by  the  Editor,  as  I  have  previously  re^ 
jected  the  idea  of  a  mixed  nature  of  (Jod,  mai^  and 
lion,  (^tT^T^^tJ  )  in    which    Hindoos   profess  their 


/3 

faith.     1  have  not   the   most  distant   recollection  of 
acknowledging    Christ's    divine   and   human  nature, 
and    shall  therefore   feel   obliged  if   the   Editor  will 
have  the  goodness   to  point   out  in  what  passage  of 
chapter   second  of   my  Appeal  I  acknowledged   this 
mystery.     I  have  never,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  ridi- 
culed, even  in  thought,  the  intercession  of  Jesus  for 
mankind:  I    therefore    hope    that  Christian  charity 
will  restrain  the  Editor  from  imputing  to  me  in  future 
such  a  charge.     I  only  intended   to   refute  the  argu- 
ment adduced  by  Trinitarians,  tliat  no  being   can  in- 
tercede with   another  being  for  a   third  one,  unless 
the  mediator  be  possessed  of  the  nature  of  the  beino- 
with  whom,  as  well  as  of   those  for  wliom  he  inter- 
cedes. 

To  this  assertion  of  the  Editor,  "the  blood  of  no 
mere  creature  could  take  away  sin,"  f  add  the  asser- 
tion also  maintained  by  the  Editor,  that  "the  Creator 
is  not  composed  of  blood  and  flesh,"  and  leave  to  him 
to  say,  if  the  blood  of  Jesus  was  not  that  of  a  crea- 
ture whose  blood  it  was.  It  is  evident  from  the  cir- 
cumstance  of  the  blood  of  a  creature  being  unable  to 
take  away  sin,  and  the  Creator  having  no  blood,  that 
the  taking  away  of  sin  can  have  no  connexion  with 
blood  or  a  bloody  sacrifice. 

The  Editor  declares,  (page  .551,)  that  "no  one  but 
Jehovah,  the  unchangeable  God,  could  atone  for  sin, 
justify  the  sinner,  and  change  his  heart :  the  Father 
liimself  witnesses  that  it  is  Jehovah  whom  he  hath 
appointed  to  this  glorious  work."  "He  humbled 
himself  by  becoming  in  our  nature  the  mediator  be- 
tween God  and  men."    Nothing  that  I  can  conceive. 

JO 


V     * 


,    f 


V 


/^ 


74 

but  prejudice  in  favor  of  the  Trinitj,  can  prevent  the 
Editor  from  perceiving  gross  inconsistency  between 
his  declaring  Jesus  to  be  the  unchangeable  Jehovah, 
and  also  to  have  been  appointed  by  Jehovah,  accord- 
ing to  whose  will  the  former  Jehovah  humbled  him- 
self  in  becoming  in  our  nature  a  Mediator.     How 
could    the   unchangeable  Jehovah  be  endued  with  a 
new    honor  which   lie  had  not   prior  to  his  appoint- 
ment   by   the   latter  Jehovah  ?    IIow  could   the  un- 
cliangeable  God  change  his  condition   by  assuming  a 
new  nature  ?    If  the  acceptance  of  a  new  state  of 
honor,  the  assuming  of  a  new  nature,  or  the  altera- 
tion of  properties,  such  as  magnitude  and  other  con- 
ditions, be  not  considered  as  changes  in  an  object,  all 
phenomena  may  safely,  according   to   the    Editor's 
maxim,    be  called  unchangeable  ;  and   consequently 
the   application  of   the   term   "  unchangeable'^  beino- 
common  to  Jehovah,  and  those  who  are  not  Jehovah, 
can  imply  no  peculiar  ground  of  distinction  or  reve- 
rence  for  Jehovafi.     The    Editor  says,  (page  555,) 
"Nor   does  it"  (the  Scripture)   "give  us   the  least 
hmt    that   God   ever  has  imparted   any  one  infinite 
perfection  to  a  finite  creature.     This,  indeed,  is  im- 
possible in  its  own  nature."     I  therefore  beg  to  ask. 
whether  or  not,  on  the  same  ground,  it  is  not  impos- 
sible, in  its  own  nature,  that  the  whole  of  the  omni- 
present God  should  be  brought  into  a  circumference 
of  a  small  space,  subjected  to  all  human  feelings,  and 
clothed  at  one  time  with    two  op[)osite  natures,  hu- 
man and  divine. 

The  Rev.  Editor,    in   the  concluding  part  of  the 
subject  of  the  atonement,  attempts  to  prove  the  infir 


75 


\ 


nite  perfection  of  Jesus,  forgetting,  perhaps,  the  de- 
nial made  by  Jesus  himself  of  omniscience,  as  well  as 
omnipotence,   as    narrated   in  the  evangelical    writ- 
ings.     He  er]tirely  avoids  here  noticing  what  1  stated 
in  proof  of  the  fiiiite  effects  of  Christ's  appearance  in 
the  world  ;   wliich  1  now  repeat,  and   beg  that  the 
Editor  will  favor  me  with  a  reply  thereto.     My  ar- 
gument is,  "  That  the  effects  of  Christ's  appearance 
on  earth,  whether  with    respect   to  the  salvation  or 
condemnation  of  mankind,  were  finite,  and  therefore 
suitable  to  the  nature  of  a  finite  being  to  accomplish, 
is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  to   the    present  time 
millions  of  human   beings  are  daily  passing  through 
the  world,  whom  the  doctrines  he  taught  have  never 
reached,  and  who,  of  course,  must  be  considered  as 
excluded  from  tlie  benefit  of  Jn's  having  died  for  the 
remission  of  their  sins."     (Second  Appeal,  pp.  205, 
206.)      Besides,  it  is  worth  observing,  that  an  avow- 
al   of  the    beginning    of   creation,    and  of   its   end, 
amounts    to  a  proof  of  the   finite  number   of  crea- 
tures, however  numerous  they  may  be  ;   therefore  an 
atonement  even  for  the  remission  of  the  sins  of  all 
of  them  must  be  of  a  finite  nature. 

Sliould  it  be  alleged  that  the  sins  committed  by  a 
single  individual,  in  the  limited  period  of  his  life, 
though  they  are  finite  in  themselves,  yet  are  com- 
mitted against  the  infinite  God,  and  thereby  they  are 
mfinite,  and  tiiat  an  atonement  on  the  part  of  an 
mfinite  being  is  therefore  necessary  for  their  remis- 
sion; I  shall  reply— In  the  ilrst  place,  the  assertion 
that  the  guilt  committed  against  an  infinite  Being  is 
infinite  in  its  consequences,  is  entirely  unsupported  by 


/b 

reason  or  proof,  and  is  contrary  to  scriptural  author- 
ities; for  we  find  that  the  Israehtes  were,  from  time 
to  time,  alllicted  with   finite  punishment  for  the  sins 
they  committed  against   the   infinite  God.      1  Chron. 
xxi.  11,  [12];    ''So  Gad   came   to   David,  and  said 
unto  him.   Thus  saith  the    Lord,  choose  thee  either 
three  year's  famine,   or  three   months  to  be  destroyed 
before  thy  foes,  while  that  the  sword  of  thine  ene- 
mies overtake  thee  ;   or  else  three  days  the  sword   of 
the  Lord,  even  the  pestilence,   in  the   land,  and  the 
an^el   of  the    Lord    destroying;    throughout   all    the 
coasts  of  Israel,"  Slc,      Ver.  15:  "  And  God  sent  an 
angel  unto  Jerusalem,   to  destroy  it  ;  and  as  he  was 
destroying,    the  Lord  behe/d,  and  he  repented  him  of 
the  evil,   and   said  to   the  angel  that   destroved.  It  is 
enough,   stay  now   thine   hand,"  kc.     Judges  xiii.  1 : 
''  And  the  children  of   Israel  did  evil  in  the  siirht  of 
the  Lord  ;     and  the   Lord   delivered    them  into  the 
hand  of  the  Philistines /b/7y  years,"^ 

In  the  second  place,  were  we  to  admit  the  truth 
of  this  argument,  we  must,  upon  iUc  same  ground, 
as  far  as  reason  suggests,  esteem  a  good  act,  done 
for  the  honor  of  the  commandment  of  the  infinite 
God,  or  a  prayer  oOered  to  |)ropitiate  the  Divine 
iMajesty,  to  be  also  worthy  of  infinite  reward  as  its 
effect.  Under  these  circumstances  we  cannot  help 
observing,  that  among  those  that  believe  in  any  rev- 

Ik 

elation,  either  true  or  received  as  true,  there  is? 
probably,  no  man  that  has  not  performed,  at  least, 
one  single  righteous  act  during  the  whole  period  of 
his  life ;  but  as  he  is  a  mortal  and  imperfect  being, 
he  cannot  be  supposed   to  have  escaped  cverv  sin  in 


I 


77 


this  tempting  world:  every  man,  then,  must  be  both 
guilty  of  infinite   sin   and  an  agent  of  infinite  virtue. 
If  we  suppose  that  this  very  person  is  to  be  punish- 
ed   for   eternity,   according    to   the    Editor,   for  the 
infinite  sin  he  has  committed,  there  will  be  no  oppor- 
tunity of  his  enjoying  an  infinite  reward  for  his  good 
work  ;  but,   according   to   the  position,    he    must  be 
either  rewarded  for  his  good  or  punished  for  his  evil 
actions   for  eternity,   while  justice  requires    that  he 
should  experience  the  consequences  of  both.     Would 
it  be  consistent    with  the  perfect   nature  of   the  just 
God,  to   afllict  one  with  eternal   punishment  for  his 
guilt,  leaving,  at  the    same  time,  his  good   deeds  un- 
noticed  entirely,    though   performed  with  a  view  to 
the   glory  of  God?     Is  it  not,   therefore,   scriptural 
as  well  as  reasonable,  that  all  men  sliould  be  judged, 
after  death,  according  to  their  good  and  evil  works  • 
and  then,  that,  through  the  intercession  of  one  who 
stands  as  a  mediator    between  God  and   man,   those 
wlio    have,  through  Christ,   truly  repented,  shall    be 
admitted    to   enjoy    infinite    beatitude    by    the   free 
bounty  of  the  Fatlier  of  the  Universe,  to  which  they 
are  not  entitled  by  their  own  merit  ? 

As  to  such  phrases  n^  everlasting  fire,  or  everlastiny; 
punishments,  found  in  the  English  version,  I  beg  to 
refer  my  readers  to  the  original  Greek,  in  which  the 
term  «/wjos-,  being  derived  from  anor^  denotes,  fre- 
quently, duration  or  ages  ;  that  is,  "  durable  fire,"  or 
''  durable  punishments."  Besides,  they  may  find  the 
term  "everlasting,"  when  applied  to  an  object  wo/ 
divine,  implies  long  duration.  Genesis  xvii.  8  :  "  And 
I  will  give   unto  thee,   and  to   thy  seed   after   thee, 


^» 


78 

the  land  wherein  thou  art  a  stranger,  all  the  land  of 
Canaan,  for  an  everlasting  possession,"  6ic.  xlix.  26: 
-  The  blessings  of  thj  father  have  prevailed  above 
the  blessings  of  my  progenitors,  unto  the  utmost 
bound  of  the  everlasting  hills,"  kc,  Hab.  iii.  6  :  '^  He 
stood  and  measured  the  earth  :  He  beheld  and  drove 
asunder  the  nations  ;  and  the  everlasting  mountains 
were  scattered,  and  the  perpetual  hills  did  bow.' 
Vide  Note  in  the  Second  Appeal,  page  277. 


CHAPTER  III. 

INQUIRY    INTO   THE    DOCTRINE    OF  THE   TRIMTV. 

Section   I, 
The  Pentateuch  and  Pi^alms. 

I  now  proceed  to  examine  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  a  term  which  although  it  is  frequently  intro- 
duced both  in  orthodox  writings  and  conversation, 
as  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  Christianity,  yet  is 
not  once  found  in  any  part  of  the  sacred  books. 

The  first  position  the  Editor  advances,  in  support 
of  the  deity  of  Jesus,  (page  556,)  is,  that  the  angel, 
who  is  said  in  Gen.  xlviii.  16,  to  have  redeemed  Ja- 
cob, was  Jesus  himself,  as  he  appears,  "  in  the  Scrip- 
ture, distinct  from  the  Father  and  able  to  redeem," 
and  that  the  same  redeeming  being  was  the  angel 
who  spoke  to  Jacob  in  a  dream,  «  I  am  the  God  of 
Bethel,"  (Gen.  xxxi.  13:)  and  appeared  to  Moses 
*'  m  a  flame  of  fire,  out  of  the  midst  of  an  unconsuni- 
ed  bush,"  (Exoilus  iii.  2,)  and    who   came   up  from 


79 

Gilgal  to  Bochim,  and  said,  "  I  made  you  go   up  out 
of  Egypt,"  &c.  (Judges  ii.  1,)  and  called  unto  Abra- 
ham, out  of  the  heaven,  and  said,  "  Thou  hast  not 
withheld  thy  son,  thine  only  son  from  me,"  (Gen.  xxii. 
12,)  whence  the  Editor  concludes,  that  Christ  beino- 
the  redeeming  angel,  and  that  redeeming  angel  being 
the  angel   that  spoke  of  himself  as  God  in  other  in"^ 
stances,  Christ  is  God.     The  Editor,  although  he  fills 
more  than  two  pages  witli  this  argument,  yet  never 
thinks   of  producing  a  single  authority  for  his  infer- 
ence, that  the  angel  who  redeemed  Jacob,  was  Christ, 
or  for  his  identifying  that  angel   with  those  angels' 
whom  the  Editor  considers  as  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Abraham,   Isaac,  and   Jacob.     The  only  reason  he 
asssigns  for  his  first  supposition  is,  that  the  angel  ap- 
peared "  distinct  from  the  Father  and    able  to  re- 
deem ;"  hence  he  was  Christ  who  is  represented  as 
the  redeemer  of  his  people.     Can  the  circumstance 
of  the  performance  of  similar  acts,  by  two   persons, 
identify  one  with  the  other?     If  so,  we    must,  ori 
the  same  ground,  identify  God  with  the  human  race, 
the   scriptures  having  ascribed   to  them    both,  such 
attributes  as  mercy,  wrath,  reward,  and  punishment; 
and  we  also,  on  the  same  principle,  must  maintain 
the  identity  of  Jesus  with  all  those   that  are  said   in 
the  sacred  books  to  have  redeemed  people  at  diifer- 
ent  times.     Isaiah  Ixiii.  9  :  "  In  all  their  affliction  he 
Mas  afflicted,   and   the  angel  of  his  presence  saved 
them ;  in  his  love  and  in  his  pity  he  redeemed  them, 
and  he  bare  them,  and  carried  them  all  the  days  of 
old."     Ruth  iv.   14:    "And   the   woman   said   unto 
Naomi,  Blessed  be  the  Lord  who  hath  not  left  thee 


I 


i 


80 

this  day  without  a  redeenier^^  *?KJI  tl  at  his  name 
may  be  famous  in  Israel.''  Neh.  v.  8  :  "  We,  after 
our  ability,  have  redeemed  our  brethren  the  Jews, 
who  were  sold  unto  the  heathen." 

Were  we  to  admit,  for  a  moment,  that  the  angel 
who  redeemed  Jacob  was  indeed  Jesus,  it  would  ne- 
cessarily  follow,  according  to  the  Editor,  that  there 
was  Christ-man-Jesus,  God-Jesus  and  Angel-Jesus; 
that  is,  that  Christ  is  possessed  of  a  three-fold  na- 
ture, and  that  he  is  to  be  esteemed  as  an  obedient 
servant  in  his  human  capacity,  as  a  faithful  messen- 
ger in  his  angelical  nature,  and  as  an  inde[)endcnt 
master  and  employer  in  his  divine  essence  ! 

If  it  be  alleged  that  the  term  anerel  is  here  only 
figuratively  applied  to  Jesus,  I  shall  rcj)ly,  that  we 
find  nothing  in  the  verse  that  can  prevent  the  appli- 
cation of  the  term  "  ans^el"  to  the  anijel  of  God,  in  its 
literal  sense ;  no  one,  under  such  a  circumstance,  can 
be  justified  in  adopting  a  metaphorical  meaning j 
nevertheless  we  will,  in  conformity  to  the  spirit  of 
the  sacred  writings,  maintain  the  opinion  that  God  is 
the. only  true  redeemer,  and  that  his  Christ,  his  an- 
gels, and  his  prophets,  are  redeemers  in  a  secondary 
sense;  that  is,  they  arc  the  instruments  in  the  hand 
of  God  in  his  works  of  redemption.  If  the  scrip- 
tures do  not  scruple  to  call  angels,  like  Jesus,  "•  Gods,*' 
and  "Sons  of  God,"  in   a    metaphorical   sense,  we 


*  In  the  English  Bible  the  term  kin'^inan  is  here  efnployed.  Thi-s,  how- 
ever, is  inaccurate,  which  will  appear  by  refcrrinj;  to  the  context.  It  i* 
tljcreby  made  evident,  that,  before  the  birth  of  this  son,  Ruth  and  Naomi 
had  Boaz  and  others  as  their  kinsmen,  and  therefore  the  expression,  "  who 
hath  not  left  thee  this  day  without  a  kinsman,"  cannot  have  reference  to  tbf 
child  then  born.  Besides,  the  synonymous  term,  "  restorer  of  thy  life,"  u»fil 
in  versf  \hi\\  for  the  child,  suflicicntly  determines  the  meaning;. 


siiould  not  wonder  if  we  find  the  term  "  redemer" 
applied  to  any  angel  of  God,  in  an  inferior  sense. — 
Psalm  xcvii.  7:  '"  Worship  him,  ye  gods."  Judges 
xiii.  21,  22:  "Then  Manoah  knew  that  he  was  an 
angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Manoah  said  unto  his  wife, 
We  shall  surely  die,  because  we  have  seen  God." — 
Job  i.  6  :  "  The  sons  of  God  came  to  present  them- 
selves before  the  Lord."  As  to  his  latter  supposi- 
tion, that  the  angel  who  redeemed  Jacob  was  the 
same  that  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream,  and  to  Abra- 
ham and  to  others,  on  diiferent  occasions,  the  Editor 
neither  attempts  to  assign  reasons,  nor  does  he  en- 
deavor to  shew  any  authority  for  his  assertion.  He 
might,  perhaps,  lay  stress  on  the  definite  article  pre- 
fixed to  the  word  "  angel,"  in  several  of  these  in- 
stances, in  the  English  version,  (which  he  cannot  do 
without  total  disregard  to  the  idiom  and  use  of  the 
Hebrew  language,)  and  thereby  might  attempt  to 
substantiate  the  identity  of  one  angel  with  the  other. 
He  would,  however,  in  this  case,  soon  perceive  his 
own  error,  if  he  should  refer  to  Judges  xiii.  16, 
where  the  angel  (with  the  definite  article  in  the  com- 
mon version)  says  to  Manoah,  "  Though  thou  de- 
tain me,  I  will  not  eat  of  thy  bread :  and  if  thou  wilt 
olFer  a  burnt-olfering,  thou  must  oiler  it  unto  the 
Lord,"  declaring  himself  unworthy  of  the  worship 
due  to  God  alone;  or  if  he  sfiould  turn  to  2  Samuel 
xxiv.  16,  where  the  angel  is  represented  as  an  obe- 
dient messenger  of  God,  a  destroying  instrument  in 
llic  hands  of  Jehovah.  Many  other  instances  might 
he  cited  of  a  similar  nature.     How,  then,  can  Jesus, 

if  he  be  the  being  termed  the  angel,   speak  of   him- 

11 


82 

self,  (as  the  Editor  supposes,)  as  God  in  one  instance, 
while  in  others  he  renounces  his  own  deity,  and 
even  declares,  that  he  destroys  the  lives  of  thousands 
by  the  command  of  a  superior  being? 

Let  us  now  examine  whether  or  not  the  prophets, 
as  well  as  the  angels  of  God,  in  the  delivery  of  his 
message  and  his  will,  did  not  often  speak  in  behalf  of 
God,  as  if  God  himself  had  spoken.  I  confine  my 
notice  to  the  prophets  ;  for  were  I  to  point  out  any 
angel  speaking  in  behalf  of  Jehovah,  without  distinc- 
tion of  persons,  the  Editor  might  attempt  to  deduce, 
from  this   very   circumstance,  that  that  angel  was 

God  the  Son. 

Instances  similar  to  the  following  abound  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Isaiah  x.  4—7  :  "  Without  me  they 
shall  bow  down  under  the  prisoners,  and  they  shall 
fall  under  the  slain.  For  all  this  his  anger  is  not 
turned  away,  but  his  hand  is  stretched  out  still.  0 
Assyrian,  the  rod  of  mine  anger,  and  the  staff  in  their 
hand  is  my  indignation.  I  will  send  him  against  an 
hypocritical  nation,  and  against  the  people  of  my 
wrath  will  I  give  him  a  charge  to  take  the  spoil, 
and  to  take  the  prey,  and  to  tread  them  down  like 
the  mire  of  the  streets.  Howbeit  he  meaneth  not 
so,  neither  doth  his  heart  think  so  ;  but  it  is  in  his 
heart  to  destroy  and  cut  off  nations  not  a  few.^'  Cli. 
xxix.  1,  [1 — 3]:  "Wo  to  Ariel,  to  Ariel,  the  city 
where  David  dwelt!  add  ye  year  to  year;  let  theui 
kill  sacrifices  ;  yet  I  will  distress  Ariel,  and  there 
shall  be  heaviness  and  sorrow  :  and  it  shall  be  unto 
me  as  Ariel.  I  will  camp  against  thee  round  about, 
and   will  lav  siege  against  thee  with  a  mount,   and  I 


83 

will  raise  forts  against  thee."  Micah  iv.  13  :  "Arise 
and  thresh,  O  daughter  of  Zion,  for  I  will  make>" 
&c.  Ch.  V.  1  :  "  Now  gather  thyself  in  troops,  O 
daughter  of  troops ;  he  hath  laid  siege  against  us  : 
they  shall  smite  the  judge  of  Israel  with  a  rod  upon 
the  cheek.  But  thou,  Beth-lehcm  Ephratah,  though 
thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah,  yet  out 
of  thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me,  that  is  to  be 
ruler  in  Israel,"  &c.  Now,  I  presume,  the  Editor 
will  not  propose  to  identify  these  prophets  with  the 
Deity  ;  yet  he  must  admit  that  his  argument,  if  it 
have  any  weight  at  all,  must  force  us  to  submit  to 
that  monstrous  conclusion. 

In  the  course  of  this  argument,  the  Rev.  Editoi" 
asserts,  that  "Christ  also,  in  John  viii.  declares  him- 
self to  be  precisely  what  Jehovah  declares  himself 
in  Exodus  iii.  14 :  '  Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  1  am  hath  sent  me  unto  you.' — 
John  viii.  24  :  '  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  (he  being 
supplied)  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins  ;'  and  ver.  58, 
'  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  before  Abraham  was, 
I  am.'"  How  is  it  possible  that  the  Editor,  a  dili- 
gent student  of  the  Bible  for  thirty  or  forty  years, 
can  have  made  such  a  palpable  mistake  as  to  assert, 
that  the  declaration  of  Jehovah,  in  Exod.  iii.  and 
that  of  Jesus,  in  John  viii.  cive  precisely  the  same  ?  It 
is  but  his  zeal  to  support  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  that  can  have  prevented  him  from  examin- 
ing the  phrases  found  in  these  two  chapters.  In 
Exod.  God  says,  "  Thus  shalt  thou  say  to  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  n\nK  n^TN  n^nN*  '  the  being  who 

*n%*lN  ^^  *he  future  tense  of  ,-|>p|  to  be,  which  Uterally  implies  "  I  shall 
be,"  and  i^  used  for  "  I  am,"  thnt  is.  ««  I  am  and  shall  be  :"  equivalent  to  the 


is  being'  li.ith  j^ent  me  unlo  vou  ;"'  a  phrase  in  Ih. 
brew,  Aviiich  implies  Him  who  alone  can  be  described 
as  only  mere  being  or  existence,  and  which  is  trans- 
lated in  the  Greek  Septuagint,  though  not*  verv 
correctly, f;w  eiui  'o  w^,  ^*  I  am  the  being."  But  in  the 
Gospel  of  John  (viii.  24)  the  words  are,  ''  I  am,"  (he 
or  Christ,)  and  in  the  original  Greek,  eyto  ttiit, "  I  am," 
without  the  addition  of 'oo)i,u  ^he  being,"  as  is  found 
in  the  Septuagint.  in  the  Hebrew  translation  of 
John  viii.  24,  NIH  ^JK,  or  "  1  he,"  is  found.  So,  in 
ver.  58,  we  find  only  */w  aui,  or  "  I  am."  In  John 
viii.  24,  the  word  Xi^icioi  is  of  course  supplied  in  com- 
paring with  Matthew  xxiv.  5,  "  1  am  Christ,"  and 
with  John  iv.  25,  26.  I  would  then  ask,  is  n\"TN 
n\nX  nC'NS  or  "the  being  who  is  being,"  a  phrase 
precisely  the  same  with  fy^  nut,  or  "  1  am"  ?  ff 
so,  it  must  require  a  mode  of  argument  to  prove  it, 
ecjually  beyond  my  comprehension  with  the  myste- 
rious doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which  it  is  brought  to 
sup[)ort. 

From  the  circumstance  of  Jesus  having  announced 
"Before  Abraham  was,  I  am,"  (ver.  58,)  the  Editor 
concludes,  that  ^'  the  Jews  at  once  understood  him  to 
declare  himself  God,  and  took  up  stones  to  stone 
him ;  nor  did  Jesus  hint  that  they  had  mistaken  him  ;'* 
— a  silence  which  the  Editor  thinks  amounts  to  the 
tacit    acknowledgment   by  Jesus  of  his  deity.     But 

"  eternal  being."  The  Jews  consequently  count  this  term  among  the  names 
of  God,  as  IS  evident  from  its  being  used  in  agreement  with  a  verb  in  the 
(hird  person,  as  in  the  above-cited  verse. 

*  I  say  not  very  correctly,  because  we  find  in  the  Septuagint,  the  term 
n^n{<'  rendered  o'wi,  or  the  being,  in  one  instance,  and  f-y^.j  ^fu^  in  lien 
«.l  the  same  term  H^HN  «"  the  other. 


I 


85 

from  the  context  of  ver.  58,  it  appears  clearly  that 
the  indignation  of  the  Jews  arose  from  the  idea  that 
Jesus  declared  himself  not  merely  the  contemporarv 
of  Abraham,  but  even  gave  out  that  before  x^L bra- 
ham,  he  was  ;  and  that  it  was  for  this  they  attempt- 
ed to  stone  him.  It  is  not  the  only  instance  in  which 
Jesus  left  the  Jews  to  labor  under  a  misconception 
of  his  meaning,  for  we  find  the  same  to  have  been 
the  case  in  several  other  instances.  Thus,  John  ii. 
19 — 21  :  "Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them.  De- 
stroy this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it 
up.  Then  said  the  Jews,  forty  and  six  years  was 
this  temple  in  building,  and  wilt  thou  rear  it  up  in 
three  days  ?  But  he  spake  of  the  temple  of  his 
body."  John  vi.  53,  66,  viii.  26,  27 :  "1  have  many 
things  to  say  and  to  judge  of  you  ;  but  he  that  sent 
me  is  true  :  and  I  speak  to  the  world  those  things 
which  1  have  heard  of  him.  They  understood  not 
(hat  he  spake  to  them  of  the  Father." 

The  Editor  mentions,  (page  559,)  that  "  Job  also 
testifies  that  the  redeemer  is  God,"  and  quotes  Job 
xix.  25,  26:  "  For  1  know  that  my  redeemer  liveth, 
and  that  he  shall  stand  at  the  latter  day  upon  the 
earth.  And  though  after  my  skin  worms  destroy 
this  body,  yet  in  my  flesh  shall  I  see  God."  I  fully 
coincide  with  the  Editor  in  this  declaration.  Not 
Job  alone,  but  all  the  other  writers  of  the  sacred 
books,  testify  that  the  true  redeemer  is  God ;  and 
they  all  expected  him  to  cast  his  mercy  upon  them, 
both  at  the  last  moment  of  their  life,  and  at  the  last 
period  of  the  world.  1  am  at  a  loss  to  know  what 
expression  in  the  passage  in  question  has  induced  the 


X  .-• 


86 

Editor  to  refer  to  the  other  texts  cited,  "  would  we 
know    whether   by  God,  Job   means  some   inferior 
deity,  neither  creature   nor  creator;"  for  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  term  redeemer  is  frequently  in 
the  sacred  writings   npphed  in  its  strict   sense  to  the 
Most  High  God;  and   that    the  phrases,  "  He  shall 
stand  at  last,"  and  "  I  shall  see  God,"  which  are  also 
found  in  the  above  passage,  are  often  spoken  of  the 
Supreme  Being,  without  implying  any  necessity  of 
understandmg  them  as  applicable  to  an  inferior  deity, 
either  creature  or  creator.      Exodus  xxxiv.  5:  "And 
the  Lord  descended  in  the  cloud,  and  stood  with  him 
there,"  kc.     Zech.  xiv.  3,  4:  "  Then  shall  the  Lord 
no  forth  and  fiijht  against  those  nations,  as  when  he 
fought  in  the  day  of  battle.     And  his  feet  will  stand 
in  that  day  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives,  which  is  be- 
fore Jerusalem."     JNumb.  xiv.  14:    "That  thou  art 
seen  face  to  face."     Matt.  v.  8 :  "  Blessed  are  the 
pure  in  heart,  for  they  shall  see  God."    The  phrase, 
"  at  the  latter  day,"  found  in  ver.  25,  is  incorrectly 
rendered  in  the  English  version  as  the  translation  of 
the  Hebrew  P"^nX,  as   has    been  already  noticed  in 
page  44.     [Note.] 

The  Editor  refers  his  readers  to  Psalm  ii.  last 
verse,  "  Kiss  the  son,  lest  he  be  angry,  and  ye  per- 
ish from  the  wav,  when  his  wrath  is  kindled  but  a 
little.  Blessed  are  they  who  trust  in  him," — leaving 
the  context  carefully  out  of  sight.  I  therefore  deem 
it  proper  to  cite  the  precedmg  verses  here,  that  the 
public  may  judge  whether  the  verse  referred  to  by 
the  Editor  be  directly  applicable  to  Jesus  or  to  Da- 
vid.     David    thus  relates   the  circumstance  of  the 


87 


iiostile  disposition  of  the  heathen  kings  against  God 
and  agfainst  his  anointed  David  himself,  in  verses 
I — 3,  and  the  despite  of  God  at  their  vain  boast,  in 
verses  4 — 6.  He  then  mentions,  in  verses  7 — 9,  how 
God  afforded  him  consolation  :  "  I  will  declare  the 
decree  :  the  Lord  hath  said  unto  mc,  thou  art  my 
son  ;  THIS  DAY  HAVE  I  BEGOTTEN  THEE.  Ask  of  me,  and 
I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine  inheritance, 
and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  posses- 
sion. Thou  shalt  break  them  with  a  rod  of  iron  ; 
thou  shalt  dash  them  in  pieces  like  a  potter's  vessel." 
David  lastly  mentions  what  God  recommended  those 
lieathen  kings  to  do  for  their  safety,  verses  10 — 12: 
"  Beware  now,  therefore,  O  ye  kings  ;  be  instructed, 
ye  judges  of  the  earth  !  Serve  the  Lord  with  fear, 
and  rejoice  with  trembling.  Kiss  the  son,  lest  he  be 
angry,"  &c.  Here  Jehovah,  in  verse  7,  calls  David, 
"  My  son^  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee^''  correspond- 
ing with  Psalm  Ixxxix.  27,  "  Also,  I  will  make  him 
(David)  my  first-born,  higher  than  the  kings  of  the 
earth."  I  must  again  say,  that  nothing  except  the 
violent  force  of  early-acquired  prejudice  can  lead 
any  one  to  the  direct  application  of  the  term  "  son" 
(found  again  in  verse  12  of  the  same  Psalm,  relating 
to  the  same  subject)  to  another  than  David.  God 
again  assures  David,  in  verses  8,  9,  that  he  would  have 
the  heathen  for  his  possession,  and  that  he  would 
break  the  heathens  and  dash  them  to  pieces.  So 
we  find  in  [1]  Chron.  xiv.  8  :  "  When  the  Philistines 
heard  that  David  was*  anointed  king  over  all  Israel, 
ull  the  Philistines  went  up  to  seek  David  :  and  Da- 

*  Vi»le  Psalm  Ii.  2,  "  against  his  anointed  " 


vid  heard  of  it,  and  went  out  a^^ainst  them.*'  \'er. 
16,  [17]  :  "  David  therefore  did  as  God  commanded 
him  :  and  they  smote  the  host  of  the  Phihstines 
from  Gibcon  even  to  Gazer.  And  the  fame  of  Da- 
vid went  out  into  all  lands  ;  and  the  l^ord  hrouo^ht 
the  Jcar  of  him  upon  all  nations.''^  And  ch.  xviii.  1 — 8 : 
"  Now  after  this  it  came  to  pass,  tliat  David  smote 
the  Phihstines,  and  subdued  them,  and  took  Gath 
and  her  towns  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Phihstine^^. 
And  he  smote  Moab ;  and  the  Moabites  became 
David's  servants,  and  brought  gifts.  And  David 
smote  Hadarezer,  king  of  Zobah,  unto  Hamath,  as 
he  went  to  estabhsh  liis  dominion  by  the  Euphrates. 
And  David  took  from  hioi  a  thousand  chariots,  and 
seven  thousand  horsemen,  and  twenty  thousand  foot- 
men :  David  also  houghed  all  the  chariot  horses, 
but  reserved  of  them  an  hundred  chariots.  And 
when  the  Syrians  of  Damascus  came  to  help  Hada- 
rezer, King  of  Zobah,  David  slew  of  the  Syrians 
two  and  twenty  thousand  men.  Then  David  put 
garrisons  in  Syria-damascus,  and  the  Syrians  became 
David's  servants,  and  brought  gifts.  Thus  the  Lord 
preserved  David  whithersoever  he  went.  And  Da- 
vid took  the  shields  of  gold  that  were  on  the  ser- 
vants of  Hadarezer,  and  brought  them  to  Jerusa- 
lem. Likewise  from  Tibhath,  and  from  Chun,  cities 
of  Hadarezer,  brought  David  very  much  brass, 
wherewith  Solomon  made  the  brazen  sea,  and  the 
pillars,  and  the  vessels  of  brass."  And  also  ch.  xx. 
2,  3  :  "  And  David  took  the  crown  of  their  king 
from  off  his  head,  and  found  it  to  weigh  a  talent  of 
gold  ;  and  there   were  precious  stones  in  it  ;  and  It 


89 

Avas  set  upon  David's  head  :  and  he  brougiit  also 
exceeding  much  spoil  out  of  the  city.  And  he 
brought  out  the  people  that  were  in  it,  and  cut  them 
with  saws,  and  [with]  harrows  of  iron,  and  with  axes. 
Even  so  dealt  David  with  all  the  cities  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Ammon.  And  David  and  all  the  people  re- 
turned to  Jerusalem."  Do  not  such  denunciations 
as,  "Thou  shalt  break  them  with  a  rod  of  iron,'' 
"Thou  shalt  dash  them  in  pieces,"  found  in  ver.  9 
of  the  above  Psalm,  correspond  with  1  Chron.  xviii. 
[xx.],  "David  smote  (he  Philistines;"  "he  smote 
Moab  ;"  "  David  smote  Hadarezer  f  "  David  slew^ 
of  the  Syrians  two-and-twenty  thousand  men ;" 
"  David  took  the  crown  of  their  king  from  off  his 
head;"  "and  cut  them"  (the  citizens)  "  with  saws, 
and  with  harrows  of  iron"?  Are  not  these  directly 
suitable  to  the  history  of  David,  the  conqueror,  call- 
ed by  God,  his  son,  rather  than  to  the  office  and 
nature  of  tiic  meek  and  lowly  Jesus,  who,  thouo-h 
most  exalted  among  the  sons  of  God,  w^as  himself  the 
victim  of  the  rage  of  unbelievers  ?     Even  upon  the 

Trinitarian  system,  do  not  such  sentences  as  «  ask 

I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen  for  nn  inheritance,*' 
corresponding  with  the  passages  in  Chronicles,  "  The 
Lord  brought  the  fear  of  him"  (David)  "  7qjon  all 
nations;'  "Thus  the  Lord  preserved  David  whither- 
soever  he  went,"— admit  of  better  application  to 
David,  whose  glory  depended  from  time  to  time  up- 
on his  supplications  to  God,  than  to  Jesus,  who,  as 
God  himself,  according  to  the  Editor,  was  possessed 
of  mfmitc  power  and  glory  from  eternity,  and  need- 
'm1  not  to  ask  of  another  ?     Docs  not  such  addrcs 

12 


»sv: 


90 


91 


to  the  licathcn  kings  as  "  Kiss  the  son,  icst  iie  be 
anory,"  ^c.  agree  ^vith  the  circumstances  mentioned 
in  1  Chron.  xviii.  [xx.]  :  '•  The  Moabites  became  Da- 
vid's servants,  and  brought  gifts;"  "the  Syrians 
became  David's  servants,  and  brought  gifts;"  "and 
he  brought  out  the  people — and  cut  them  with  saws, 
and  [with]  harrows  of  iron,  and  with  axes.  Even  so 
dealt   David  with  all  the  cities  of  the   children  of 

Amnion"? 

The  opponents  whom  David  broke  "  with  a  rod 
of  iron,"  were  his  political  enemies  ;  consecjuently 
the  assertion  of  the  Editor,  that  "  the  destruction 
to  spiritual  enemies  is  no  where  in  scripture  de- 
scribed as  arising  from  the  wrath  of  a  mere  crea- 
ture," has  no  ajjplicabilily  to  the  subject  in  question. 
As  to  his  assertion,  "  Propliets  denounced  on  men 
the  wrath  of  God,  and  pronounced  on  them  a  curse 
in  his  name,"  I  only  refer  the  Rev.  Editor  to  2 
Kings,  V.  26,  27,  in  which  Elisha  is  said,  when 
displeased  at  the  conduct  of  his  servant,  to  have 
miraculously  'punished  him  with  leprosy,  without 
pronouncing  on  him  verbally  any  curse  in  the  name 
of  God  ;  and  also  to  Exodus  xxiii.  21,  wherein  he 
will  fmd  that  the  angels  of  God,  if  provoked,  have 
the  power  of  keeping  away  pardon  from  men. 

It  may,  however,  be  fairly  concluded  from  the 
authority  and  acts  of  Jesus  himself,  that  both  the 
angels  and  the  prophets  of  God,  in  performing  mila- 
cles,  either  of  punishment  or  reward,  according  a^ 
ihey  were  disposed,  applied  always  to  God  for  pow- 
er, though  they  sometimes  omitted  to  express  such 
applications  verballs .     John  xi.  4  K  42  :   "  And  .lesus" 


P 


t 


(in  raising  Lazarus  from  the  dead)  "  lifted  up  his  eyes 
and  said.  Father,  I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard 
me  ;  and  1    knew    that    thou    hearest  me    always:' 

From  the  words,  "  who  trust  in  him,"  found  in  the 
second  Psalm,  the  Editor  attempts  to  prove  the  dei- 
ty of  the  Son  on  the  supposition  that  the  phrase  "  to 
trust  in"  is  exclusively  applicable  to  God,  and  corrob- 
orates his  o[)inion  by  Jer.  xvii.  5,  forgetting  that  this 
term,  though  it  is  often  used  with  reference  to  God, 
yet  is  applied  sometimes  to  created  beings.  Prov- 
erbs xxxi.  11:"  The  heart  of  her  husband  doth 
safely  trust  in  her,  so  that  he  shall  have  no  need  of 
spoil."  Isaiali  xiv.  32  :  "  The  Lord  hath  founded  Zi- 
on,  and  the  poor  of  his  peo[)le  shall  trust  in  it."  As 
to  Jer.  xvii.  5,  quoted  by  the  Editor,  *•  Thus  saith 
Jehovah,  Cursed  be  he  that  trusteth  in  man,  and 
maketh  tlcsh  his  arm,  and  whoso  heart  departeth 
from  Jehovah,"  it,  of  course,  implies  that  he  who 
trusts  in  man,  inde[)endcntly  of  God,  should  be  curs- 
ed, as  appears  from  the  last  sentence  of  the  same 
verse,  "  whose  heart  departeth  from  Jehovah." 

Tlie  E  iitor  quotes  Psalm  xxiv.  [1,  2]  ;  "  The  earth 
is  Jehovah's  and  the  fulness  thereof,  the  world  and 
thev  that  dwell  therein;  for  he  hath  founded  it  up- 
on the  sea,  and  established  it  upon  the  floods,"  and 
com[)arcs  it  with  John  i.  3,  "  All  things  were  made 
by  him,  (the  W^ord,)  and  without  him  was  not  any 
thinor  tnade  which  was  made."  The  inference  which 
he  draws  from  this  comparison  is,  that  "  In  creating 
power,  Christ  is  equal  to  Jehovah."  Were  we  to 
overlook   the    mistranslation   of  this    verse*  in   the 

*  All  things  were  done  by  him.]  "  All  things  were  made  by  him,  and  with- 
out hiiu  was  not  any  thing  uuuW  that  was  made."     Newcome  :  who  explains 


i4 


/ 


92 

Englihh  version,  (vvliich  it  is  almost  impossible  not  to 
notice,)  and  to  understand  tlie  passage  as  it  stands  in 
the  orthodox  translation,  we  should  esteem  Jesus  as 
the  cause  of  all  created   things.     But  we  should  be 
in  tliis  case    naturally    inclined  to  ascertain    whether 
Jesus    was    an  e/hcicnt   or  an    instrumental  cause    of 
those  tilings  ;  since  the  preposition  "  by,"  found  in 
the  verse,  signifies  either  a  [)rincipal  agent  of  an  ac- 
tion, or  an  instrument  therein.     We  find  Heb.  i.  2, 
(as   it   stands  in  the    English  version,)   deciding   the 
question    beyond    a  doubt:  "(God)   hath    in    these 
last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son^  whom  he  hath 
appointed  heir  of  all   things,  h\^  whom  also  he  made 
the  worldsr     Eph.   iii.  9  :  '*  Who  (God)  created  all 
things   by   Jesus  Christ."     Here  all   the   worlds  are 
represented   as  made    by  Jesus   as  an   instrument  in 
the  hands  of  God.     It  is  hoped  that  after  reflecting 
upon  this  decision,   by  the  author  of  these   Epistles, 
the  Editor  may,    |x?rhaps,   retract  his  assertion,  that 
*'  in  creating  power  Christ  is  equal  to  Jehov  ah,"  and 
be  of  opinion  that  the  world  was  made    by  the  will 
of  one    being.     Could   not   Jehovah,    to   whom    the 
Editor  ascribes  omnipotence,  create  this  world  inde- 
pendently of  another  omnipotent  being,  equal  to  liim 
'•  in  creating  power"  ?     If  not,  the  w  orld  must  be,  in 

it  of  the  creation  of  the  visible  material  world  by  Christ,  as  the  agent  and  in- 
strument of  God.  See  his  notes  on  verses  3  and  10.  But  this  is  a  hense 
which  the  woid  e^aiaro  will  not  admit.  J\u/uc<i  occurs  upwards  of 
seven  hundred  times  in  the  New  Testament,  but  never  in  the  sense  of  create. 
it  signifies  in  this  gospel,  where  it  occurs  fifty-three  times,  to  be,  to  come,  to 
become,  to  come  to  pass  ;  also  to  be  done  or  transacted.  Chap.  xv.  7,  xix.  36. 
It  has  the  lattei  sense,  Matt.  v.  18,  vi.  8,  xxi.  42,  xxvi.  6.  All  things  in  the 
Christian  dispensation  were  done  by  Christ ;  i.  e.  by  his  authority,  and  accord- 
ing to  his  direction ;  and  in  the  ministry  coumiiited  to  his  apostles,  nothing 
has  been  done  without  his  warrant.  See  John  xv.  4,  5  :  "  Without  me  ve 
can  do  nothing."  Compare  verses  7,  10,  16  ;  John  xvii.  8  ;  Col.  i.  16,  17  j 
I'appe,  ibid.   (Impioved  Version.) 


93 

this  case,  the  joint  production  of  Jehovah  and  Christ, 
as  well  as  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  (whom  the  Editor 
here  omits  to  notice,)  and  each  of  them  must  de- 
pend upon  the  others  in  creation,  like  joint  managers 
of  a  concern.  Can  the  Editor  point  out  any  set  of 
men,  or  any  nation  professing  a  grosser  polytheism 
than  this?  The  only  difference  that  he  can  show 
between  his  notion  and  that  of  avowed  polytheists. 
must  consist  only  in  respect  of  the  increase  or  de- 
[  crease  of  the  supposed  number  of  creators — a  dis- 
tinction which  will  amount  to  nothina;  intrinsic.  I 
must  now  leave  the  subject  to  the  sound  judgment 
of  my  reader. 

The  Editor  further  proceeds,  saying,  "  With  refe- 
rence to  Christ,  Paul  adds  (1  Cor.  x.  25,  26,)  'What- 
soever is  sold  in  tlie  shambles,  that  eat:  for  the 
earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  the  fulness  thereof.'"  He 
then  concludes,  "If  this  Psalm  (xxlv.  1,)  then,  speak 
of  Jehovah  the  Father,  the  same  absolute  dominion 
over  the  earth  is  here  ascribed  to  the  Son  as  to  the 
Father;  if  the  Son,  he  is  there  termed  Jehovah." — 
St.  Paul  here  justifies  the  eating  of  whatever  is  sold 
in  the  shambles,  referring  to  Psalm  xxlv.  1,  as  his 
reason  for  such  justification,  without  the  most  distant 
allusion  to  Jesus  :  I  am,  therefore,  at  a  loss  to  discov- 
er the  ground  upon  which  the  Editor  founds  his  fore- 
going conclusion.  For  further  illustration  I  quote 
the  paraphrase  by  a  most  eminent  personage  on  the 
above  verses  of  Corinthians :  "  Eat  whatever  is  sold 
in  the  shambles,  without  any  inquiry  or  scruple, 
whether  it  had  been  offered  to  any  idol  or  no.  For 
the  earth  and  all  therein  are  the  good  creatures  of 


^■ 


^4 


i 


\ 


■^1 

"■I 


94 

(lie  true  Ciod,  given  by  him  to  men  for  their  use  '*— 
(Locke,  Vol.  VIII.)    If  the  Editor  still  insists,  in  defi- 
ance of  St.  Paul's  reference,  of  common  sense,  and  of 
(he  above  paraphrase,  that  in  1  Cor.  x.  26,  St.  Paul 
alludes  to  Jesus,  I  should  take  upon  myself  to  refer 
him  to  Hebrews  i.  2,  (the  Son,)  "whom  he  (God) 
hath  appointed  heir  of  all  things T  and  to  John  iii.  3,% 
•'  The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things 
into  his  hand."     These  I  hope  will  convince  him  that 
all  the  power  and   possession  of  the  Son,  in  heaven 
and  on  earth,  are  derived  from  the  gift  of  the  Fath- 
er of  the  universe. 

The  Editor  quotes  1  Cor.  x.  22  :  «  Do  we  provoke 
the  Lord  to  jealousj?     Are  we  stronger  than  he  '?" 
whence  he  infers  that  "  the  Lord  then  is  capable  of 
bcmg  provoked  bj  the  worship  of  idols  equally  with 
God."     Granting  that   St.  Paul  means  Jesus  by  the 
term  "Lord,"  and  by  the  pronoun  "  he,"  in  verse  the 
22d,  (a  position  which  is  unsupported  by  proof.)  wo 
still   find  nothing  in  the  passage  elevating  Jesus  to 
equality  with  his  Father.     The  apostle  mav,  accord, 
ing  to  the   Editor's   interpretation,    be    supposed    to 
have  prohibited  Christians  from  provoking  Christ  to 
jealousy,  by  partaking  of  the  cup  and  table  of  deviN^ 
instead  of  those  of  Christ,  of  which  their  Master  re- 
quired them  to  partake,  as  appears  from  the  imme- 
diately preceding  verse—"  Ye  cannot  drink  the  cup 
of  the  Lord,  and  the  cup  of  deviis.     Ye  cannot  be 
partakers   of  the    Lord's  table,  and  of  the   table   of 
devils."     Is  it  not   natural  that  Jesus,  who  enjoined 
the  apostles  to  observe  the  Lord's  Supper,  would  be 
provoked  to  jealousy  by  his  followers'  partaking  both 


I 


95 

of  his  table,  and  of  (he  sacrifice   oflbred   to  idols, 
without  his  thereby  equalizing  himself  with  God  ?— 
I  find  that  the  prophets  of  God  are  declared  in  more 
pointed  terms  to  have  been  jealous  of  the  dishonor 
manifested  to  God;  but  no  one  has  ever  felt  dispos- 
ed to  ascribe  to  them  equality  with  his  Divine  Maj- 
esty.     1  Kings  xix.  10  :  "And  he  said,  I  have  been 
very  jealous  for  the    Lord   God  of  hosts ;  for  the 
children  of  Israel    have  forsaken  thy  covenant,  and 
^  thrown  down  thy  altars,"  &c. 

I  will  repeat   verbatim  the    Editor's  quotation  of 
Psalm  xxiv.  8,  and  Eph.  iv.  8,  and  his  inference  of  the 
deity  of  Jesus,  from  the  comparison  of  the  one  with 
(he  other,  that  my  reader  may  perceive  how  violent- 
ly prejudice  can  operate  upon  the  human  mind.     He 
says,  (page  561,)  that  "  in  verse  8th,  one  is  about  to 
enter  heaven   as  the    king  of  glory;  who  is   called 
'Jehovah,'   mighty  in   battle."     In   Eph.  iv.  "Jesus. 
elsewhere  styled  the  Lord   of  glory,  ascends,  having 
Icd^captivity  captive,  which  implies  battle  and  victo- 
ry.*    Here,  also,  the  Son  is  either  described  as  equal 
ill  might  to  Jehovah,  or  as  Jehovah  himself."    There 
arc  not  in  verse  eighth,  nor  in  the  whole  Psalm  xxiv 
such  phrases  as  "  captivity  captive,"   or  "  ascend  on 
liigh,"  as  found  in  Eph.  iv.  8 ;  nor  are  there,  in  the 
whole  chap.  iv.   of  Ephesians,  the  terms  "king  of 
glory,"  or  even  «  Lord  of  glory,"  or  "  mighty  in  bat- 
tle," as  we  find  stated  in  the   above  Psalm.     The 
1  salm  commences  by  a  declaration  of  God's  sove- 

banlT"'nIfnT;„i' '"!  ''?!■  '»I'H"'>'  <=»Ptiv'i,"  is  not  synonymous  to  "  miffhtv  in 


I 


i  . 


4  i:§h 


m 


.  1 


jj 


I 


/ 


9G 

rcign,^  over  the  earth-proceeds  to  state  the  virtues 
that  must  belong  to  those  u  ho  seek  his  presence  and 
des.re  h.s  blessing-and  concludes  .ith'an  ex,.o  t a 
t.on  o  Jerusalem  to  receive  him  as  the  king  of  Ho- 
rj_the  Lord  of  hosts.  But  the  subject  of  the  abov^ 
verse  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesia'ns,  is  Jesus  wl 
ascended  on  h.gh  to  give  divine  gifts  to  men,  after 
he  had  descended  first  into  the  .uddle  of  the  .r^^Tl 

'•n:^:;'?'"  ^'-  ■•--diatoi,  following  ver;:: 

i^ow  that  he  ascended,  what  is  it,  but  that  he  also 
descended  rnst  into  the  lou-er  parts  of  the   earth^^  and 

£ph  .V  8,  .s  an  obv.ous  reference  to  Psalm  Ixviii.  ]8 
a  fact  which  IS  acknowled-red  even  bv    VI      n 
niirl  M>.    I  1  *  "y   '^''^-   Brown 

and  J\J,.  Jones,  and  many  other  Trinif.„;.„       •. 
,,  rpi        ,  /    "1111,1    1  ru)it<inan  writers- 

V^^TT'  '"  '--'^  "'-  '--  '-'  captii" 

ly  capti\e,  thou  Jiast    rcceivffl   o-iff     i*^ 

r       .1  ,  »«-^^i»tu   ffilts   lor   men*   vr>Q 

for     he  rebellious  also,  that  tli^  Lord  God    mlht' 
dwell  among  then./'     But  the  Editor  omits  here' 
ompare  t  e  passage  in  Ephesians  with  the  las  -me  ! 

;; '•^•>  His  objert.  "Thou/.i:irj^:t:'r 

t  at   he  lord  God  might  duell  amon,  'LPj^ 

,>  ^"■-     '"  ^"'""^'-  explanation,  I  repeat 
«_^.e  note  of  Mr.  Locke,  on  verses  9  and  ,0  of  EpC 
-n  his  paraphrase  of  this   Epistle,  page  477      Note 
on  verses  9    10-  «Sf   Po   p  "^  ^ 

two  vnr  I  i;  1.  '  «'g"mentation,  in  these 

o    hi   F      ;,  "  i  ^""^  '^'^•''''"^''  '«   "-  n>ai„  design 
of  ins  Epistlo.      The  converte.1  GV„,iles  were  attack 


i 


97 

ed  b^  the  unconverted  Jews,  who  were  declared  en- 
em.es  to  the  thoughts  of  a  Messiah  that  died.  St- 
^aul,  to  ene.vate  that  objection  of  theirs,  proves,  by 
the  passage  out  of  the  Psalu.s,  (v.  8,)  tha    he  mus( 

several  of  them  that  were  converted  to  the  Gospel 

clve  r'  '''''T'  '"  "-  -'  ^"-'^^^   ^he  GeJ^^ 
converts  on  another  g,-ou..d,  persuading  them  that 

ihoy  could  not  be  admitted  to  be  the  people  of  God 
under  the  kn^dom  of  .l.«  ivi„    •  i  F'^  oiooa, 

adv«n*n„       "8°°'"  o*  "'e  Messiah,  nor  receive   any 

t.tut.on.     He    had   sa.d  a  great  deal,  in  the   three 
first   chapters,  to  free    the,.,  from    this   ,K.rplex  tv 

fe  iment,  by  te  h,.g  them  that  Christ,  the  same   Jesus 
t  c  r'i:f',:"^  7rf  '"  '"  ^'•^'^^''  -^  -alted    o 

..pon  no   other   te.-n.s,   but    ba,-ely  af t   e   ^  Hi ' 

After  ha vi..g  compared  Psalm  sxxvi.  6    «0    ). 
.oval,    thou  p..eservest  man  a..d  beast,"  ivitlfco- 
wo,rI   nf    1  '  "  "P'^'*'^^  *»"  «'»ings  by  the 
woia  ot    Ins    power"    iU^    r  J ..         ,        ^      -^       e 

^•The   Son   thin   ■       V,  ^^"^   '^'"^   concludes, 

^on,  men,  is   either  equa    to  Jehovah  m  , 
serving  power    m-    T^i         i    i-        ""  *'*^"o^an  m  pre- 
to  pu>vcr,   oi    JeJjovah  himself"     Tn    *i       r 

'"»••'••  "■ »-  a,,c..,„  „„„„„„„■'•  ,„,,t;:, !;: 

J  fj  •' 


.1 


!ii 


;  I 


iiim   all   things  consist,"   there   is  the    phrase  -  all 
things  are  united  in  hira,"  which  of  course  bears  no 
comparison  with  the  above  Psalm,     «0    Jehovah 
thou  pieservest  man  and  beast."      In    the  second 
place,  he    maj-  perceive    from  the  context,   that   by 
the    term    "all    things,"    the    apostle    could     have 
meant  only  the  things  concerning  the   Christian  dis- 
pensation ;  for    we    find,  in   the    verse    immediately 
following,  Jesus  is  declared  to  be  "  the  head  of  the 
body,   the   church,"    and    in    the  preceding  verse* 
« the   things"   are   enumerated  as  orders  and   ranks 
in  the  religious  and  the  moral  world,   and   not  natu- 
ral substances.     In  the  third   place,   admitting  even 
the  mterpretation  of  the  Editor,  that  all  natural  sub- 
stances  consist  by   Jesus,  we   cannot  help  yielding 
conviction   to   the   repeated  avowal  of  Jesus,   man,^ 
festing  that  the  support  of  all  things,  or  the  things  of 
the   new   dispensation  by  Jesus,  is  entirely  owin<^   to 
the  power  vested  in  him  by  the  Father  of  all  things. 

and  earjh,  but  things  in  heaven  and    thing    on  ei.h     2X  hT,"""  '""" 
defending  m.o  detail,  specify  thing,  themsehetwi   ceLtilf  t7  T'' '" 
trial  substances,  but  merely  states  of  thin^,     ,i,    IL^         L     '  .     """■ 
which  are  only  rauks  and  orders  of  be  n«  T'th^  n.  in??''  t"""";"''  *"• 
Sdly,  It  is  plain,  from  comparing  verl5*and  verlsT.r^"''  """'^   ""''''• 
first-born  of  the  whole  creationf  because  he  is  rhffirJ^     h    ""  "  ':''""''  "" 
the  dead  to  an  immoilal  life;  4thly  The  creatinLr    J^      ,    "j"  ""'  "'""'  f™"" 
the  earth,  and  sea,  and  all   hinesVerei "  '  °"  ?,^  ""'"'^   objects,  the  heaven, 
ocally  mentioned,  is  unifomly^aid    'lan^bTv  »!  ^h"'?  '''"'"!>■  ""■*  ""^l""' 
in  the  Old  Testanlent  and  ™  tL  New      Hence   h  fnlf   '"  '^  K^'^"-    '«'"' 
which  the  apostle  here  ascribes  to  Ch^i^t  eXDresUsS""'  "■.■"  >""  ""'*°"' 
was  introduced  into  the  moral  world   and  nar^irfnLv     ,^,l"  '^T"-^"  ^'"'*' 

Uon  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  by  the  di^lj,-;r  Vhr^-Pcl'  "Thi';?  'T' 
called  creation,  or  the  new  creation    anH  ia  ..«     n  gpspei.      ihm  is  often 

who  was  the  g;eat   prophet  anTre;se.f.er  ^^^^^^^^^  ''"'"'   ^*^"^'' 

change  the  aposUe  here  describes  under  the  Jn.K^ilf  ,     •       ^^'^  ^reat 

by  Christ  amongst  certain    ranks  and  ord^r^^nfh  •;«^o'"tion.  introduced 

to  *he  Jewish  demonology,  borrowed  fror^^^^^^^^^^  '"/^''  '^  ^^'T '  "^^^^^'"S 
of  states  and  individuals  ie^rsuDerXd^nr'"'  P»"'"-«Phy,  the  affa.rs 
.ey.  sequel,  page  .77,  and  N^^tXn^ li^'.^^t p^rre?^^tsi^^  ^^"^■ 


99 

without  which,  he  is  totally  unable  to  support  them 
John  xvu.  2  :  .  Thou  hast  ^ven  hj\the  Son) 
-  power  over  all  flesh."    Ch   v   30  •  «  1  ^      • 

The  r'h  H  ^^"'5"  ^'^°'  ^"  'he  things  belonging  to 
But  if  th  P  r  ^'^P«"^^"-'  -  I  observed  beLe. 
.0  P  e tati  '^""  '"'■^*^  "'^''"  »"■«  -^de  of  in 

which  V.  h     '^^'''"''S  to  John  XIV.  24,    «  The  word 
',;   r;;  "' ""'"  '•"  '^^  ^«'^-'^'"  and  Matt. 

and  on   eirth      rTv."  ^"'^  """   '"^  "»  '^--^ 
n   earth,     must  be   convinced  that   the  worrl 

of  jxnver,  by  which  Jesus  upholds  or  rules  aJ.  th  i^' 

''  "  *^^*'  belonging  to  the  Father. 

Ed;rt;a':s7;4:  s-v'^  '7  -' '--'  ^'^ 

in  Heb.  i    8    XT ,,    ^  ^'''™  ^'^-  ^' ^'  quoted 

and  ever  "  \J'l    '"■°"^'   ^,  '^''^'"'^^  -  forever 

to  Jesus  th.  f  r'r  "'^'  ''^'^''^'  '^^'  to  apply 

10  Jesus  the  term  "  Jehovah  "  ih^  i-  ^^^ 

God   thp  FJif^  •'enovan,    the  peculiar  name  of 

"»-»wii,  me  HiUitor   nervpr^c  ih^  , 

placing  the  word^.  jX:!;-  i::;:;.?!^""^ 

^^flr  thVcrlat^  'TT  "^--^y  -^'"o 
tonces.     He  a^the     '  '"'  ""'^''^  ^"P^"-'-  -- 

original  pfa  m    n  H  T'  ''::''  r^'^*^'^  ^"*'-'>-  '^<^ 
Gol"  and   at    th        '"  ?T^'*'  "  '^^''>'  '^'°--'  « 

now  beg  to  ask  the  E  It      .     ,  "''*^'    ^    ^°'^-"      ' 
•hority   for    th^s   1  m  ''*  ™''  ''""^^   '"'«  ^u- 

for  my  own  na      ""'^.'^7"";^'^'«    ^''-nge.     I  should, 
"V  own  part,  be  indeed  verv  sorrv  ^^  i      i  , 

"f  mv  opinions  If  I  f  "  ^'^y  sorry  jnd  ashamed 

.      P'n.ons.  ,f  I  fo„nd  myself  compelled  to  make 


■^ 


s 


-' '/ 


«3 


/ 


^ 


100 

perversions   of  scriptural    passages,  and  to  set   aside 
the    suggestions  of   common  sense,   to  support   the 
doctrines    that  1  may  have    been    persuaded  to   pro- 
fess.    It  is  again  worth  observing,  that  the  Editor 
quotes   \\\Q    above    passage   of  Psalm   xlv.    omitting 
entirely  to  notice   my   remarks  on  it  in   the  Second 
Appeal.      I  am,  therefore,  induced  to  repeat   them^ 
m  the  hope  that  he  may  reply  to  them,  and  adopt  a 
regular  mode  of  argumentation.     After  stating  that 
Moses  was  also  called  God  in  [the]  Scriptures,  1  thus 
proceed :  "  On  what  principle,  then,  can  any  stress 
be  laid  in  defence  of  the  deity  of  the  Son,    in  the 
prophetic  expression  quoted  in  Hebrews  from  Psalm 
xlv.  6,  '  Thy    throne,  O   God,  is  forever  and  ever' ; 
especially   when    we    find,    in    the    very  next  verse, 
words  that   declare   his  subordinate    nature,  <  Thou 
iovest  righteousness  and  hatest  wickedness,  therefore 
God,  thy  God,  hath  anointed   thee   with   the  oil    of 
gladness  above  thy  fellows  T ''  (Page  170.)    "But  it 
deserves  particularly  to  be  noticed,  in   this  instance, 
that  the  Messiah,  in  whatever  sense   he  is  declared 
God,  is,  in  the  very  same  sense,  described  in  verse  7, 
(*  God  thy  God,')  as  having  a  God  superior  to  him, 
and  by  whom  he  was  appointed  to  the  office  of  Mes- 
siah." (Page  285.) 

In  the  third  place,  no  scripturalist  ever  hesitated 
to  apply  Psalm  xlv.  directly  to  Solomon,  after  his 
marriage  with  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  as  is  evi- 
dent  from  the  context :  «  My  heart  is  inditing  a  good 
matter:  I  speak  of  the  things  which  1  have  made 
touching  the  king :  my  tongue  is  the  pen  of  a  ready 
writer.     Thou  art  fairer  than  the  children  of  men: 


I 


iOl 

grace   is  poured  into  thy   lips :  tlierefore  God  l)ath 
blessed  thee  forever.     Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  forev- 
er and  ever:   the  sceptre  of  thy  kingdom  is  a  right 
sceptre.     Thou  Iovest  righteousness,  and  hatest  wick- 
edness :  therefore  God,  thy  God,  hath  anointed  thee 
with  the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy  fellows.    Kings' 
daughters  were  among  thy  honorable  women :  upon 
thy  nght  hand  did  stand  the  queen  in  gold  of  Ophir. 
Hearken,  O  daughter,  and  consider,  and  incline  thine 
car ;  forget  also  thine  own  people,  and  thy  father's 
house :  so  shall  the  king  greatly  desire  thy  beauty  ; 
for  he  ts  thy  Lord,  and  worship  thou  him.    Instead  of 
thy  fathers  shall  be  thy  children,  whom  thou  mayest 
make  pnnces  in  all  the  earth."    If  the  application  of 
the  word  •'  God"  in  an  accommodated  sense,  entitle 
Jesus  to  deity,  how  much  more  properly  should   the 
direct  application  of  the  same  word,  "  God,"  to  Sol- 
omon, according  to  the  Editor,  exalt  him  to  a  partic- 
ipation in  the  divine  nature  ? 

The  Editor  afterwards  quotes,   in  defence   of  the 
deity  of  Jesus,  Psalm  cii.  25-27,  referred  to  bv  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,     (i   10—12  ) 
"Thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning  hast  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  the  earth,  and  the  heavens  are  the  works  of 
thy  hand.     They  shall  perish;  but  thou  remainest : 
and  they  all   shall  wax  old  as  doth  a  garment :  and 
as  a  vesture  shalt  thou  fold  them  up,  and  they  shall 
be  changed  :  but  thou  art  the  same,  and  thy  years 
shall  not  fail."    The  construction  here  admits  of  two 
interpretations:  one   is,  that   verses   10—12,  are  in 
continuation  of  verses  8,  9,  addressed  to  the  Son  by 
Hod.  as  supposed  by  the  Editor :  the  other  is.  that 


t. 


-I- 


||- 


I 


'li' 


♦  I 


% 


102 

.1.0  author  of  ti.e  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews   invokes 
his  Divine  Majesty  by  quoting  Psalm  cii.  25—27,  af- 
ter he  has,  ,n   the   preceding  verse,  introduced   the 
name  of  God,  as  anointing  the  Son  above  his  fellows, 
to  shew  the  continual  duration  of  the  honor  bestow- 
ed on  the  Son,  as  flowing  from  the  unchangeable  and 
preserving  power  of  the  bestower  of  that  honor.- 
To  ascertain  which  of  these  two  interpretations  the 
apostle  had  in  view,  let  us  now  refer  to  the  context. 
One's  exaltation  above    his  fellows    by  another,  on 
account  of  his  merit,  as  stated  in  the  preceding  verse. 
(9,)  IS  quite  inconsistent  with   the  immutable  charac- 
ter mentioned  in  verses  10-12,  and,  therefore,  these 
two  opposite  qualities  can  by  no  means  be  ascribed 
to  the  same  being.     Again,  in  the  followin.^  verse 
(13,)  the  apostle,   to  prove  the  superiority"  of  thJ 
Son  over  angels,  asks,  "  To  which  of  the  angels  said 
be,  at  any  t.me.  Sit  on  my  right  hand  until  1  make 
thme  enemies  thy  footstool"?    Here  common  sense 
dictates,  that  if  such  expressions  as  «  Thou,  Lord,  in 
the  beginning  hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the  earth  " 
&C.;  "As  a  vesture  shalt  thou  fold  them  up;"  and 
"  I  hou  art  the  same,  and  thy  years  shall  not  fail," 
had  been  meant  by  the   apostle  as  applicable  to  Je- 
sus, he  would  not,  in  setting  forth  the  dignity  of  the 
Son   have  added  the  words,  «Sit  on  my  right  hand 
until  I   make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool ;"    which 
imply  a  much  inferior  nature  to  that  attributed  in  the 
preceding  passage,  and  which,  indeed,  may  be  par- 
a  leled  by  other  expressions  found  in  Scripture,  arv 
pied  to  mere  human  beings.      Deut.  xxxii.  10:  "He 
(.lehovah)  kept  him  as  the  apple  of  hh  eye.-  Isaiah 


J  03 

xlix.  1(3 :  "  Behold,  I  have  graven  thee  upon  the  palms 
of  my  hands:-  Psalm  xlvii.  3 :  "  He   (Jehovah)  shall 
subdue  the  people  under  us,  and  the  nations  under 
our  feet."     In  describing  the  superior  courage  and 
strength  of  a  man  who  is  reported  to  have  overpow- 
ered a  hon,  and  also  a  dog,  „o  one  endued  with  com- 
mon sense   would,  after  stating  the  former  fact,  ad- 
duce the  latter  as  an  additional  proof  of  courage  and 
strength,  as  it  is  evident  that  to  kill  a  dog  is  a  feat 
by  no  means  of  so  wonderful  a  nature   as  that  of 
overcoming  a  lion.     My  reader  may  recollect  Matt. 
XX,..  45:    "If  David  then  call  him  (the   Messiah) 
Lord,  how  IS  he  his  son  ?"  which  tells  us  that  Jesus 
disproves  the  assertion  of  the  Messiah  being  the  son 
of  David,  on  the  ground  that  no  father  could  consist- 
ently call  his  son  "  Lord,"  much  less  could  he  apply 
to  his  son  the  term  "  my  Lord."     Were  we  to  admit 
the  hrst  interpretation,  upheld  by  the  Editor,  and  to 
consider  the  passage,  "  Thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning  " 
&c.  as  a  part  of  the  address  of  Jehovah  to  Jesus,  we 
must,  m  conformity  to  the  argument  used  by  Jesus 
himself  ,n  Matt.  xxii.  45,  relinquish  the  commonly- 
received  doctrine,  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God    and 
actually  admit  his  superiority  to  the  Father  of  the 
universe   who,  according  to  the  Editor,  addresses  him 
as  "  Lord"  in  Hebrews  i.  10.     Either,  therefore,  the 
i^ditor  must  abandon  the  opinion  that  God  the  Fath- 
er addresses  Jesus  as  Lord,  in  the  passage  referred 
to,  or  he  must  cease  to  consider  him  as  the  «  Son  of 

(jrod." 

The  Editor  again  uses  the  word  Jehovah  in  verse 
'0,and   reads,  "Thou,   Jehovah,  in  the  beginnin-r." 


n  r 


i 


/ 


104 

6lc.  instead  of  -  Thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning,"  Ace. 
without  assigning  any  reason  for  his  deviating  from 
the   Enghsh    version,  as  well   as    the   Hebrew  and 
Greek  originals.     For  in  the  original   Hebrew  there 
is   no  "  Jehovah"  mentioned  in   Psalm  cii.  25,  and, 
consequently,  in  the  Greek  passage,  Heb.  i.  10,  which 
is  a  quotation  of  the  same  verse  of  the  above  Psalm, 
the  term  xvgie  cannot  be  supposed  to  be  intended  as 
a  translation   of   the  word  Jehovah.     So  in  the  En- 
glish version  the  verse  stands  thus,  "  Thou,  Lord,  in 
the  beginning,"  kc.     1  shall,   however,  feel  obliged 
to  the  Rev.  Editor,   if  he  can   point  out  to  me  any 
authority  for  his  substitution  of  the  word  "Jehovah" 
for  Lord,  in  the  verse  in  question. 

With  a  view  to  weaken  the    strength  of   the  evi- 
dence  found    in  1  Cor.  xv.  24,  as  to  the  changeable 
nature  of  Christ,  the  Editor  says,   (page  562,)  "  His 
original  throne  as  Jehovah  God,  is  forever  and  ever; 
his  mediatorial  throne  remains  for  a  season,  and  then 
ceases."     1  have  already  noticed,  in  pp.  170  and  277 
of  the  Second  Appeal,  and  in  the  foregoing  chapter 
of  this  work,  that  the  term  forever,  or  similar  terms, 
when  used  for  a  creature,  or  a  begotten  son,  signify,' 
m  scriptural  idiom,  long  duration  of  time.    My  reader, 
therefore,   by  referring   to   those  instances,   will    bJ 
convinced,  that  neither  Solomon,  to  whom  Psalm  cii. 
25,  is  directly  applied,  nor  Jesus,  to  whom  the  apostle 
applies    the  said  verse  in  the  above  Psalm,  in  an  ac- 
commodated   sense,   can  be    sujjposed  to  be  endued 

with  a  throne  or  kingdom  that  never  will  cease; a 

question  which    St.  Paul   decides  in  the    most  plain 
and   positives    terms,   in    1   Cor.  xv.  24,  25;  -Then 


1 05 

Cometh  the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the 
kingdom   to  God,  even  the  Father;    when  he  shall 
have  laid  down  all  rule  and  all  authority  and  power 
For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under 
his  feet."     (Ver.  28.)     And  when  all  things  shall  be 
subdued  unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  he 
subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things  under  him,  that 
God  may  be  all  in  all."     Here   the  apostle  declares, 
that  Jesus  will   in  the  end  deliver  up   his  kingdom  to 
God  the  Father,   and   not  to  God   composed  (as  the 
Editor   maintains)  of  the  Father,   the  Son,   and  the 
Holy  Gliost ;  and  that  the  Son  himself,  unlimited  to 
any  particular  capacity,  whether  mediatorial,  human, 
or  divine,  shall   be   subject  to  the  Father,  that  God 
alone  may  be  all  in  all.     Is  there  in  this  passage,  or 
in  any  other  part  of  the  scriptures,  any  authority  for 
saying  that  the  Son's   mediatorial    throne  alone  shall 
be  delivered  up  to  the  Father?  On  the  contrary,  nei- 
ther he  nor   any  one,   can  in  a  mediatorial   capacity 
exercise  a  kingdom;   but  Jesus,   as  the   king  of  our 
faith,  the    anointed   with   the  oil    of  gladness  above 
his  fellows,  has  a  kingdom  and  throne,  and  that  kincr. 
dom  only  can  he  deliver  up  in  the  end  of  the  world 
that  God  may  be  all  in  all.      Besides,  the  above  versJ 
(28)  asserts,  that  he,  as  the  Son,  the    highest  title 
that  Jesus  is  honored   with,  will   be   subject  to  him 
who  has  exalted  him  above  all  creatures.     J\o  one 
besides,  unbiassed  by  early  prejudice,  can  ever  ven- 
ture to  pronounce  such  an  opinion  as,  that  a  beiW 
can  lose  his  kingdom  m   any  capacity    whatsoever, 
J^nd  yet  be  unchangeable. 

14 


4 


'  I 


10(> 

As  some  ortlioclox  divines  had  attempted  to  prove 
the  deity  of  Jesus  from  the  circumstances  of  the 
term  "sheperd''  being  apphed  to  God,  in  Psalm  xxiii. 
[1,]  and  to  Jesus,  in  John  x.  16,  f  pointed  out  (pp. 
290,  291  of  the  Second  Appeal,)  that  the  same 
term  "shepherd"  is  used  for  Moses,  (in  Isaiah  Ixiii. 
n,  "With  the  shepherd  of  his  flock,")  and  for  the 
leaders  of  Israel,  (Jer.  xxiii.  4,  "  I  will  set  up  shej> 
herds  over  them,)  yet  that  none  of  those  persons  is 
supposed  to  have  been  united  with  God. 

The  Rev.   Editor,  although  he  acknowledges  the 
accuracy  of  my  above  assertion,  yet  tries  to  draw 
from  it  an  argument  against  me  by  means  of  one  or 
two  strange  questions.     One  is,  (page  />62,)  "  But  did 
he"  (the  author)  "  never  read  of  a  chief  shepherd, 
who,  when    he    shall  appear,    will  give    the  under 
shepherds  a  crown  of  glory  ?"     The  other  is,  "  But 
was  our  author  ignorant  that  David  was  also  one  of 
Christ's  fold,  and  Moses  and  Abraham  ?"   In  answer 
to  which,  I  must  confess  that  I  am  ignorant  of  David, 
Moses,  and  Abraham,  having  been  of  Christ's  fold: 
and  although  Jesus  is  styled  "  a  chief  shepherd,"  yet 
such  avowal  of  his  superiority  above  other  messen- 
gers of  the  Deity  neither  places  him  on  a  level  with 
Jehovah,    nor  does  it  prove  his  unity  with  the   Most 
High  God.     Can  a  chief  among   the   generals  of  a 
king,  be  ever  supposed  equal  to,  or  identified  with,  the 
king,  his  employer?     With  respect  to  the  argument 
founded  on    referring  to  Jesus  Christ,  Ezek.   xxxiv. 
23,     "  I    will   set   one    shepherd,   even    my  servant 
David,"    I    observed   in    my    Second  Appeal,   (page 
291.)   that,  even  in  this  case,"  thev  must  still  attril»- 


107 

ute  his  shepherdship  over  his  flock  to  divine  commis- 
sion, and  must  relinquish   the   idea  of  unity  between 
God  the  employer,  and  the  Messiah  his  servant."  To 
which  the  Editor  makes  reply,  "  We  must  relinquish 
a  unity  of  nature  between   the  Divine   Father  and 
the  Messiah  whom  he  sent,  just  as  much  as  we  do 
between  Cyaxares  and  Cyrus,  employed  to  lead  his 
armies,    between     Vespasian     and    Titus,    between 
George   the    Third    and   his  son,   now   George   the 
Fourth."     In  this  passage,  it  must  be  confessed  that 
>ve  have  something  like  a  clear  definition  or   exposi- 
tion of  the  nature  of  the  Trinity,  in  which  the  Editor 
professes  his  belief ;— that  is,  he  conceives  the  God- 
head to  constitute  a  genus  like  angel,  man,  fowl,  fish, 
&c.,  God  the  Son  being  of  the  same  nature  with  God 
the  Father,  just  as  the  man  George  the  Third  is  of 
the  same  nature  with  the   man  George   the  Fourth, 
though  of  a  separate   will,   inclination,  and  passion' 
and  distinct  existence— a  conception  which  is  certain- 
ly compatible  with  an  idea  of  unity  of  nature  between 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  but  which  is  entirely  incon- 
sistent with    that  of  coevality  between    them  ;  and 
implies,  that,  as  the  dilierence  of  existence,  &c.,  be- 
tween man  and  man  is  the  origin  of  the  plurality  of 
mankind,  so  the  diircrence  of  existence,  &c.,  between 
God  and  God,  must  cause  plurality  in  the  Godhead. 
Can  there  be  any  polyiheistical  creed  more   clear 
and  more  gross  than  this?    Yet  the  Editor  will  take 
It  amiss   if  charged  with  Polytheism.     It  is  worth 
observing,  that  the  orthodox,  so  far  from  establish- 
ing  the  unity  of  the  Messiah  with  God  by  means  of 
the   above    passage.   "  I  will  set  one  shcpcrd  over 


k- 
t 


/ 


f 


tJietn,  even  my  servaut  Davidr  ctin  at  most  but  prove 
unity  between  the  Messiah  and  God's  servant  David, 
In  the  course  of  this  argument,  the  Editor  says, 
that  "  he  had  adduced  many  other  passages  in  which 
the  Son  is  called  Jehovah/'  I  wonder  at  this  asser- 
tion. I  find  hitherto  only  two  places  in  which  he 
apph'es  the  word  Jehovah  to  Jesus,  "Thy  tlirone,  O 
God  !"  &c.,  "  And  thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning,"  &c. 
The  Editor  takes  upon  himself  to  use  the  term  Je- 
hovah instead  of  "  God"  in  the  former,  and  instead 
of  "Lord"  in  the  latter  instance,  as  before  noticed, 
and  now  he  gives  out  his  own  perversion  of  those' 
texts  as  authority  ! 

Mr.  Jones  having  attempted  to  deduce  the  deity 
of  Jesus  by  a  comparison  of  Ephes.  iv.  18,  with  Psalm 
Ixviii.  18,  "Thou  hast  ascended  on  high,  thou  hast 
led  captivity  captive:  thou    hast   received  gifts  for 
men;  yea,  for  the  rebellious  also,  that  the  Lord  God 
miglit  dwell  among  them,"— I   observed,  (page  297, 
Second  Appeal,)  tliat,  "from  a  view  of  the   whole' 
verse,    the  sense   must,  according  to    this    mode   of 
reasoning,  be  as  follows— The  person   who  ascended 
on  high,  and    who  reveiccd  gifts   for  men,  that   the 
Lord  God    might   dwell  among  them,  is   tlie  Lord 
God,— an  interpretation,  which,  as  implying  that  the 
Lord  God  ascended,  and  received  gifts  fiom  a  being 
of  course  superior  to  himself,  in  order  that  he  might 
dwell  among  men,  is  ecjually  absurd  and  unscriptural." 
The    Editor  entirely  omits   to  notice   llie  foregoing 
observation,  and  only  refers  to  the  context,  inferring 
thence  that  diirerent    persons  of  the  Godhead  are 
addressed  in  the  course  of  the  Psalm.     (Page  364.) 


109 

-The   Psalm,"    he   observes,   (Ixviii.)   "commences 
with  an  address  to  God  in  the  third  person.  At  verse 
7th  he  is  addressed  in    the   second  person  :   the  sec- 
ond person  is  retained  till  verse  11th,  and  is  resumed 
again  m  this,  the  18th  verso.     If  one  person  be  not 
addressed  from  the  beginning,  therefore,  it  is  certain 
that  he  who  ascended  on  high,  identified  by  Paul  as 
Christ,  is  God,  who  went  forth   before   the   people 
through   the  wilderness."     How  is   it  possible   that 
the  Editor,  a  diligent  student  of  the  Bible  for  thirty 
or  forty  years,  should  not  know  that,  In  addressing 
God,  the    third  person  and  also  the  second  a-e  con- 
stantly used  in  immediate  sequence,  and  that  this  vari- 
ation is  considered  a  rhetorical  trope  in  Hebrew  and 
Arabic,  as  well  as  in  almost  all  the  Asiatic  languages, 
from  being  supposed  to  convey  notions  of  the  omni- 
presence and  pervading  influence  of  the  Deity?  To 
prove  this  assertion,  I  could  quote  a  great  many  in- 
stances, even  from  the  single  book  of  Psalms,  such  as 
Psalm  ni.  3—5,  &c.  and  in  a  single  ch.  2  Sam.  xxfi.  3, 
40,  in  which  God  is  addressed  both  m  the  second  and 
third  persons;  but  as  the  Editor  might,  perhaps,  allege 
in  those  cases,  though  in  defiance  both  of  the  idiom  of 
the  Hebrew  and  of  common  sense,  that  in  all  these 
instances,  David  in  spirit  meant  the  first  and  the  sec- 
ond persons  of  the  Godhead  by  the  variety  of  per- 
sons, 1  shall  quote  the  translation  of  some  lines  of  the 
Qoran,  by  Sale,  and  of  a  Jewish  prayer,   in  which 
the  same  variety  of  persons  is  used,  and  where  it 
cannot  be  imagined  that  dilferent  persons  of  the  God- 
head are  meant  to  be  therein  addressed.     Alqoran, 
^h.  I:     «  Praise  be  to  God  the  Lord  of  all  creatures' 


... » 

I- 


i^Pt 


VJ] 


}\ 


IJO 

the  most  merciful,  tlie  Kino-  of  the  day  of  judgmem. 
Thee  do  we  worship,  and  of  thee  do  we  beg  assistance. 
Direct  us  in  the  right  way,  in  the   way  of  those   to 
whom  thou  hast  been  gracious  ;  not  of  tiiose  against 
whom  thou  art  incensed,  not  of  tliose  who  go  astray/' 
Can  Mohummud  here  be  supposed  to  have  alhided  in 
spirit  to  the  first  and  second  persons  of  God,  or  lias 
he  not  rather  used  those   phrases    according  to    the 
common  practice  of  the  language  ?     The  following 
lines  are  from  a  Jewish  book   of  prayers,  written  in 
Hebrew,    and    translated  into    English*     "Sabbath 
morning  service.     'Therefore,  all   whom   God    hath 
formed,   shall  glorify  and    bless  him  ;   they  shall  as- 
cribe praise,  honor,  and  ^lory,   unto   the   King   who 
hath  formed  all  things,  and  who,  through  his  holiness, 
causeth  his  people  Israel  to  inherit  rest  on  the  holy 
sabbath.      Thy  name,   O  Lord  our  God !    shall    be 
sanctified.'"     "Morning   service.     'His  words    also 
are  living,  permanent,  faithful,  and  desirable  forever, 
even  unto  all  ages;  as  well    those  which  he   hath 
spoken  concerning  our  ancestors,  as  those  concerning 
us,  our  children,  our  generations,  and  the  generations 
of  the  seed  of  Israel,  thy  servants,  both  tlie  first  and 
the  last.'  "     A  thousand  similar  instances  mi«^ht   be 
adduced. 

In  the  Qoran,  it  is  further  remarkable  that  the 
same  change  of  person  is  adopted  when  God  is  rep 
resented  as  speaking  of  himself.  Alqoran,  II.  5: 
"Set  not  up,  therefore,  any  equals  unto  God  against 
your  own  knowledge.     If  ye  be  in  doubt  concernin«^ 

rL^!'"'^a^^  ^^t^^  Rev.  Solomon  Hirsrhell,  translated  by  Messrs.  JusUn.. 
narnet,  and  Joseph,  and  printed  in  London  by  K.  Jusiin-,  is03. 


Ill 

that  revelation  which  we  have  sent  down  unto  our 
servant,  produce  a  chapter  like  unto  it,  and  call  up- 
on your   witnesses   besides  God,  if  ye  say  truth." 

Moreover,  we  find  in  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  that  in 
speaking  of  a  third  party,  both  the   second  and  the 
third  personal  pronouns  are  sometimes  used.     Hosea 
11.    1.5—17:     "And    I  will   give   her  her  vineyards 
from  thence,  and  the  valley  of  Achor  for  a  door  of 
hope ;  and  she  shall  sing  there,  as  in  the  days  of  her 
youth,  and   as  in   the  day  when  she  came  up  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt.     And  it  shall  be  at  that  day,  saith 
the  Lord,  that  thou  shalt  call  me  Ishi;  and  shalt  call 
me  no  more  Baali.     For  I  will  take  away  the  names 
of  Baalim  out  of  her  mouth,  and  they  shall  no  more 
be    remembered  by  their  name."     Ver.  19:     "And 
I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  forever  ;  yea,  I  will  be- 
troth thee  unto  me    in  righteousness,  and  in  judg- 
ment, and  in  loving-kindness,  and  in  mercies."     The 
public  may  now  judge  what  weight  the  argument  of 
the  Editor  ought  to  carry  with  it,  and  whether  I.  ad- 
duced only  a  "Jewish  dream"  in  applying  verse  18 
originally    to  Moses,  or  whether  the  Editor  rather 
has  not  founded  his  position  on  the  ground  of  mere 
imagination.     To   me,  as  an  Asiatic,  nothing  can  ap- 
pear more  strange   than  an  attempt   to  deduce  the 
deity  of  Jesus  from  an  address  by  David  to  the  om- 
tupresent  God,  couched  in  both  the  second  and  third 
persons-      I  will,  moreover,  confidently  appeal  to  the 
context,  to  satisfy  any  unprejudiced  person  that  the 
Psalmist,  in  verse  l^th,  had  Moses  alone  in  view— 
The    Psalm,  it   will   be   recollected,    was   written  on 
the  specific  occasion  of  the  removal  of  the  ark,  which 


II 


i» 


m 


I  ♦ 


n\ 


I 


112 


was  done  according  to  the  instructions  delivered  to 
Moses  by  God  on  mount  Sinai.     David  accord inglj 
recapitulates,  in  the  preceding  verses  of  the  Psalm, 
the  wonderful  mercies  of  God    in  delivering   Israel 
from  the  Egyptians,  and  leading  them  towards  the 
promised  land.     In  verses  15 — 17,  Sinai  is  thus  men- 
tioned:    "The  hiU  of  God  is  as  the  hill  of  Bashan ; 
an  high  hill,  as  the   hill  of  Bashan.      Why   leap  ye, 
ye  high  hills?     This  is  the  hill  wliich  God  desireth 
to  dwell  in;  yea,  the  Lord  will  dwell  in  it  forever. 
The   chariots   of  God  are    twenty    thousand,   even 
thousands  of  angels  :  the  Lord  is  among  them,  as  in 
Sinai,  in  the  holy  place."     In  verse  18,  immediately 
after  mention  of  the  word  Sinai,  the  holy  place,  he 
goes  on.  Thou  hast  ascended  on  high,  thou  hast  led 
captivity  captive  :  thou  hast   received  gifts   for  men; 
yea,  for  the  rebellious  also,  that  the  Lord  God  might 
dwell  among  them  f' — the    very  reason   to  which,  in 
the   Book  of  Exodus,  the   construction  of  the  ark, 
whose  removal  was  taking  place,  is  assigned.      From 
this  it  appears  evident,  that  the  gifts  alluded  to  were 
those  granted  on  mount  Sinai ;  and  the  only  question 
that  remains  is.  Who  was  it  that  received  those  orifts 
for  men?     1  leave  this  to  be  answered  by  the  can- 
did  reader.     There  are,  besides,  many   other  pas- 
sages in  the  writings  of  the  Psalmist,  where  David, 
after   addressing   the    Supreme  Father  of   the    uni- 
verse, abruptly  addresses  himself  to  creatures,  such 
as  in  Psalm  Ixviii.  28;  iv.  1,2;  ix.  5,  6,  10,  11  ;   Ixvi. 
15,   16;  xci.    13,   14.     There  is  nothing,   therefore, 
unusual  or  strange  in  applying  the  verse  in  question, 
though  originally  relating  to  Moses,  in  an  accommo- 
dated sense  to  Jesus. 


113 


To  prove  the   figurative   application  of  the  term 
God  to  Jesus,  and  to  other  superior  creatures,  from 
the  authority  of  the  Saviour  himself,  I  quoted  (Sec- 
ond Appeal,  page  169)  John  x.  ,34,  "  Is  it  not  written 
in  your  law,  I  said.  Ye  are  Gods  ?"     With  a  view  to 
invalidate  this  argument,  the  Editor  puts  three  ques- 
tions (page  564).     The  first  is,  "  What  creatures  of 
a  superior  nature   are  here    termed  Gods?     Those 
that  die   like    men."     To    this   I   answer,  Yes;  the 
term  "God''  is  here  applied  to  those  chiefs  of  Isra- 
el who  were  men,  and  who  consequently  died  like 
men;  and  from  the  very  circumstance  of  their  hav- 
ing had  the  appearance  of  man,  and  having  been  en- 
dowed with  human  feelings,  as  well  as  their  having 
been,  like  men,  liable  to  death,  we  are  under  the  ne- 
cessity of  inferring  that  the  application  of  the  term 
God"  to  them  is  figurative,  and  that  it  is  by  no  means 
real,   though   we   find   them  exalted  by  the  terms, 
"the   sons  of  the   Most  High"  (Psalm  Ixxxii,   6^^)  J 
"  the  first-born  of  God"  (Exodus  iv.  22)  ;  the  ''  pe- 
culiar people  of  God,  above  all  nations"  (xix.  5)  ;  the 
"  kingdom  of  priests,  and  an  holy  nation"  (ver.  6) ; 
and   even   by    the   most  glorifying  title  of  "Gods" 
(Psalm  Ixxxii.   6).     Upon  the  same  ground  and  the 
same  principle,  we  must  consider  (if  not  biassed  by 
prejudice)  the  use  of  the  word  "  God,"  and  "  the  Son 
of  God,"  for  Jesus,  to  be  figurative,  as  he  himself  ex^ 
plained  (John  x.  34)  ;  for  although  Jesus  was  honor- 
ed with  abundantly  high  titles,  yet   he  was  in  the  ap- 
])earance  of   man,  and  possessed  of  human  feelings, 

*  In  tlje  original  Hebrew,  the  word  ^  jj^,  signifying  sons,  is  found,  instead 
<^l  ^n'?^*  ^'"  children,  as  found  in  the  English  version. 

15 


kk 


.)• 


V 


/ 


114 

and  liable  to  death,  like  those  chiefs  of  Israel,  as  is 
evident  from  the  following,  as  well  as   many   other 
facts  recorded  in  the  Scriptures:  "She  brought  forth 
her  first-born  son"  (Jesus).  (Luke  ii.  7.)  "  And  when 
€i<rht  days  were  accomplished  for  circumcising  of  the 
child,  his  name  was  called  Jesus."  (Ver.  21.)    "  And 
the  child  grew,  and  waxed  strong  in  spirit,  filled  with 
wisdom,  and  the  grace   of  God  was  upon  /i/m."  (Ver 
40.)     "When  he   wdiS  twelve  years''  old^  (Ver.  42.) 
"  And  was   subject  unto  them"  (his  parents.)  (Ver. 
51.)    "Jesus  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature^  (Ver. 
52.)    "  The  Son  of  Man  came  eating  and  drinking,^' 
kc.  (Matt.  xi.  19.)  "  And  when  he  had  looked  round 
about   on   them    w'lih  anger,  bcmg  grieved,'^^     (Mark 
iii.  5.)  "  Jesus,  therefore,  being  weary  with   his  jour- 
ney."   (John  iv.  6.)    "  Now  is  my  soul  troubled.^'*  (xii. 
27.)    "  And   began  to  wash  his  disciples'  feet."  (xiii- 
5.)    "  He  was  troubled  in  spirit:'    (Ver.  21.)    "  And 
beino-  in  an  agony^  he  prayed  more  earnestly^    (Luke 
xxii.  44.)    "  And  (Jesus)  saith  unto  them,  My  soul  is 
exceedingly  sorrowful,  unto  death:''    (Mark  xiv.  34.) 
"Jesus,  when  he  had  cried  again  with  a   loud   voice. 
yielded  up  the  ghost:'     (Matt,  xxvii.  50.)     "And  be- 
came obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  cross." 
(Philip,  ii.  B.)    Ought  not  the  consideration  of  the 
fore<>-oln£r  circumstances  relating  to  Jesus  Christ,  to 
have  prevented  the  Editor  from  inquiring,   "  What 
creatures  of  a  superior  nature  are  here  termed  Gods? 
Those  (Israelites)  that  die  like   men?  For  if  the 
circumstance  of  being  men,  and  dying  like  men,  must 
preclude  the  chiefs  of  Israel  from  being  supposed  to 
he  creatures  of  a  superior  nature,   notwithstanding 


115 

tiiey  are  called  gods,  the  highest  of  all  the  honora- 
ry terms  with  w  hich  any  being  can  be  exalted  ;  how 
can  the  same  argument  fail  of  proving  the  common 
humanity  of  Jesus,  who  was,  like  them,  in  the  shape 
of  a  man,  and  died  as  a  man?  If  the  Editor  say,  that 
Jesus,  though  he  died  like  man,  yet  was  raised  again 
from  the  dead,  I  shall  remind  him,  that  Enoch,  one 
of  the  sons  of  men,  and   Elijah,  a  Jewish    prophet, 
never  tasted  death  at  all,  like  other  men  ;^  that  the 
dead,  who  happened  to  touch   the  body  of   Elisha, 
revived  and  stood   up;t    and,  that   a  dead   boy  al- 
so  was   raised  by  him;J  and  then   ask  the   Editor, 
are  not    these   circumstances  more    wonderful   than 
Christ's  being  raised  after  death  ?  Is  not  the  fact  of 
Elijah's  not  having  died  at  all,  more  conclusive   evi- 
dence of  a  superior  nature,  according  to  the  mode  of 
reasoning  employed  by  the  Editor,   than  the   resur- 
rection of  Christ  after  his  death  on  the  cross  ? 

In  case   the   Editor   should  have  recourse  to  the 
generally-adopted  argument,  that  Jesus  was  possess- 
ed of  a  two-fold  nature,  the  nature  of  God  and  the 
nature  of  man  ;  the  former,  because    he  is  termed 
God  in  scripture,  and  the  latter,  because    he  was  in 
the  shape  of  man ;  I  would  ask,  is  there  any  author- 
ity in  the  sacred  writings  for  alleging  that  Jesus  was 
possessed  of  such  two-fold  nature?  A  question  which, 
indeed,  I  took  upon  myself  to  put  to  the  Editor  in 
the  Second  Appeal,  (page    252,)    but   which  he  has 
avCided  to  answer.     Are   not  Moses  and  the  chiefs 
of  Israel  termed,  in  like  manner,  gods  §  as   w^ll  as 
men  ?  ||  Did  not  they  perform    wonderful    miracles, 

-2King?ii.  11.       f  2  Kings  xiii.  21.       |  2  Kings  iv.  34,  35.       §Exod.  vii.  1 

IIDeiit,  xxxiii.  1  ;  Ezekiel  xxxiv.  31 


<« 


3- 


t  .i 


li! 


/ 


lit) 


as  raising  the  dead  and  commanding*  wind  and  water,* 
as  well  as  tlie  sun  and  moon?t  Did  not  some  of  them 
talk  of  themselves  in  a  manner  suitable  to  the  nature 
of  God  alone  ?J  Arc  we  from  these  circumstances, 
to  represent  them  as  possessing  a  two-fold  nature, 
divine  and  human?  If  not,  let  us  give  up  such  an  un- 
scriptural  and  irrational  idea,  as  attributing  to  Jesus, 
or  to  any  human  being,  a  double  nature  of  God  and 
man,  and  restrain  ourselves  fiom  bringing  Christiani- 
ty to  a  level  with  the  doctrines  of  heathenish  Poly- 
theism. Is  it  not  a  general  rule,  adopted  to  preserve 
concordance  between  all  the  passages  of  scripture, 
and  to  render  them  consistent  with  reason,  that  when 
terms,  phrases,  or  cucumstances,  which  are  applica- 
ble to  God  alone,  are  found  ascribed  to  a  created 
being,  either  man  or  angel,  these  are  to  be  interpret- 
ed in  an  inferior  sense  ?  Were  we  to  deviate  from 
this  general  rule  and  take  these  terms  to  be  real, 
Judaism  and  Christianity  would  be  but  systems  of 
Polytheism,  and  unworthy  of  adoption  by  rational 
beings.  Such  an  attempt  as  to  shew  that  Moses  and 
the  chiefs  of  Israel  having  been  types  and  shadows 
of  Jesus,  are  called  gods,  is  totally  inadmissible  ;  for 
we  find  no  authority  in  the  Scriptures  for  such  an  as- 
sertion: moreover,  had  there  been  any  authority 
declaring  Moses  and  others  to  have  been  types  of 
Jesus,  it  could  not  depreciate  the  honor  which  scrip 
ture  confers  upon  them,  by  the  application  of  the 
terms  "gods''  and  "  sons  of  God"  to  them,  any  more 
than  the  fact,  that  Christ  was  the  Saviour  of  man- 
kind, in  consequence  of  his  having  been  of  the  seed 

*  1  Kings  xvii.  1  ;  xviii.  44,  45,  and  2  Kings  ii.  22.         t  Joshua  x.  12,  and  IS 

^Dcut.  xxvii.  1.  xxxii.  1. 


117 

of  Abraham*  and  house  of  David,  as  well  as  the  rod 
of  the  stem  of  Jesse,t  could  lower  the  dignity  of  the 
Messiah,  or  could  exalt  the  rank  of  Abraham,  or  of 
David,  above  Christ. 

Such  an  apology  as  ascribes  birth,  growth,  and 
death,  to  the  material  body  of  Christ,  and  immortal- 
ity and  divinity  to  his  spirit,  is  equally  applicable  to 
those  Israelites  that  are  termed  gods. 

The  second  question  of  the  Editor  is,  "  To  whose 
nature  is  their's  (Israel's)  superior?    only  to  that  of 
the  brutes!"     in  answer  to  which  I  refer  the  Editor 
to  the    passages  already  cited,   to  wit,  Psalm   Ixxxii. 
6,   Exod.    iv.    22,   xix.    5,    6,    as   well    as   to  Exod. 
XXV.    8,    "God   was  dwelling  among  them;"  Deut. 
vii.    6,    "That   he    has   chosen   them  from  all    the 
nations,"    x.    15,  "  He  loved  them,  he  chose   them 
only ;"  xiv.  1,  "  They  are  the  sons  of  God  ;"  and  to 
numerous  passages  of  a  similar  description,   whence 
the  Editor   may  judge  whether   Israel  was  superior 
to  the  brutes  only,  or  to  the  rest  of  mankind.     The 
third  question  is,   "  if  other  gods  die  like  men,  must 
Jehovah,  who  made  heaven  and  earth,  whose  throne 
is  forever  ?"     My  answer  must  be   in  the  negative, 
because    Jehovah  is  not  a  man-god  that  shall  die  ; 
but  he,   as   the   God  of   all  gods,  and  the   Lord  of 
lords,  must  regulate   the   death  and  birth  of  those 
who  are  figuratively  called  gods,  while  he  himself  is 
immutable.     Deut.   x.    17:  "Jehovah  your  God  is 
God  of  gods,  and  Lord  of  lords."    John  xx.  17  :  "  To 
my  God  and  your  God."     Psalm  xlv.  7  :    "  God,  thy 
God,   hath  anointed  thee."— Let  us  now  again  refer 


*  Genesis  xxii.  18. 


t  Isaiah  xi.  1. 


1 


r 


'im 


%v 


/ 


11» 

to  the  context  of  John  x.  34.  In  ver.  33,  the  Je\vs 
assign  it  as  the  reason  for  their  attempting  to  stone 
Jesus,  that  he  made  himself  equal  to  God,  by*  calling 
himself  the  Son  of  God,  as  they  supposed,  in  a  real 
sense,  which  was,  according  to  tlieir  law,  blasphemy; 
Jesus,  therefore,  pointed  out  to  them,  in  ver.  34,  that 
even  the  term  "god"  is  found  figuratively  applied  to 
the  chiefs  of  Israel,  in  scripture,  without  meaning  to 
imply  thereby,  their  equality  with  God  ;  in  ver.  35, 
he  reminds  them  of  their  applying,  according  to  the 
Scriptures,  the  same  divine  term  to  those  chiefs;  and 
lastly,  he  shews  their  inconsistency  in  calling  their 
chiefs  gods,  and,  at  the  same  time,  rejecting  Christ's 
declaration  of  his  being  the  Son  of  God,  in  the  same 
metaphorical  sense,  as  being  "  sanctified"  and  "  sent" 
by  God.  Is  not  this  argument,  used  by  Jesus,  an 
evident  disavowal  of  his  own  deitv,  and  manifesta- 
tion  of  his  having  called  himself  "  the  Son  of  God," 
only  in  a  metaphorical  sense  ?  J  am  sorry  to  observe, 
that  the  Editor  seems  to  have  bestowed  little  or  no 
reflection  upon  these  texts. 

In  answer  to  my  observation  on  the  attempt  of 
orthodox  Christians  to  prove  the  deity  of  Jesus  from 
1  Cor.  x.  9,  "  Neither  let  us  tempt  Christ  as  some 
of  them  also  tempted,"  the  Editor  quotes  first,  an 
observation  of  my  own,  to  wit,  "  How  far  cannot 
prejudice  carry  away  men  of  sense  !  Are  we  not  all, 
in  common  with  Jesus,  liable  to  be  tempted  both  by 
men  and  Satan  ?  Can  the  liability  to  temptation, 
common  to  God,  to  Jesus,  to  Abraham,  and  all  man- 
kind, be  of  any  avail  to  prove  the  divinity  and  unity 

*  As  is  evident  from  the  reply  of  Jesus,  (ver.  .36,)    "  Thou  blasphemest : 
'>frau«»e  T  said  T  am  the  Son  of  God." 


119 


of  those  respective  subjects  of  temptation?"  He 
then  declares,  that  I  "was  not  correct  in  the  state- 
ment of  my  opponent's  doctrine  on  this  subject,  and 
denies  any  one's  "  having  attempted  to  prove  the 
deity  of  Christ  merely  from  his  being  tempted."  To 
shew  the  accuracy  of  my  statement,  however,  J  beg 
to  refer  the  Editor  to  Mr.  Jones's  work  on  the  na- 
ture of  Christ.  The  Editor  lastly  asserts,  that  "  it 
is  the  apostle's  declaring  that  Christ  was  he  who 
was  tempted  in  the  wilderness,  and  hence,  the  Most 
High  God,  described  by  the  Psalmist  as  tempted, 
which  is  here  adduced."  But  I  do  not  find  in  the 
verse  in  question,  nor  in  any  preceding  or  following 
verse,  "  the  apostle's  declaring  that  Christ  was  he 
who  was  tempted  61/  Israel  in  the  wilderness."  If  the 
Editor  has  met  with  such  a  declaration  elsewhere, 
he  should  first  point  it  out,  and  then  build  his  argu- 
ment upon  it.  But  unless  he  first  shew,  that  being 
tempted  by  the  devil,  and  being  tempted  by  Israel, 
mean  the  same  thing,  I  cannot  admit  any  relation 
between  the  declaration  of  the  apostles  and  that  of 
the  Psalmist. 

Relative  to  Psalm  ex.  [1,]  "The  Lord  said  unto 
my  Lord,  sit  thou  at  my  right  hand,  till  I  make  thine 
enemies  thy  footstool,"  I  observed,  in  my  Second 
Appeal,  (page  266)  "  that  this  passage  is  simply  ap- 
plied to  the  Messiah,  manifesting,  that  the  victory 
gained  by  him  over  his  enemies,  was  entirely  owing 
to  the  influence  of  God!"  To  this  the  Editor  re- 
plies, "After  the  Son  had  humbled  himself  so  as  to 
assume  our  nature  and  be  appointed  to  the  combat, 
it  was    not    to  be  expected   that   the   Father  would 


t 


V 


k 


'I 


•I 


r 


120 


forsake  him.  But  that  Jesus  had  no  might  of  his 
own,  which  our  author  would  fain  prove,  is  not  a 
fact."  Is  it  not  most  strange,  that  the  Son,  whom 
the  Editor  considers  the  immutable^  almighty  God, 
should  be  supposed  by  him  again  to  have  humbled 
himself,  and  to  have  been  appointed  by  another  to  a 
combat,  in  which  that  other  assisted  him  to  obtain 
success  ?  Are  not  these  two  ideas  quite  incompati- 
ble with  each  other  ?  If  such  positive  disavowal  of 
his  own  power,  by  Jesus  himself,  as  "  I  can  of  mine 
own  self  do  nothing,"  "All  that  the  Father  giveth 
shall  come  to  me,"  has  failed  to  convince  the  Editor 
that  Jesus  had  no  power  of  his  own^  no  argument  of 
mine,  or  of  any  other  human  being,  can  be  expected 
to  make  an  impression  upon  him. 

The  Editor  afterwards  endeavors  to  prove  the 
omnipotence  of  Jesus  by  quoting  Isaiah  Ixiii.  5: 
'•  Mine  own  arm  brought  salvation  unto  me,"  and 
Rev.  i.  8  :  "I  am  Alpha  and  Omega  ;  the  beginning 
and  the  end,  saith  the  Lord,  which  is,  and  which 
was,  and  which  is  to  come,  the  Almighty."  Suppos- 
ing these  two  last-mentioned  passages  to  be  actually 
ascribed  to  Jesus,  conveying  a  manifestation  of  his 
own  omnipotence,  would  they  not  be  esteemed  as 
directly  contradictory  to  his  positive  disavowal  of 
omnipotence,  found  in  the  foregoing,  and  in  hundreds 
of  other  passages?  How,  then,  are  we  to  reconcile 
to  our  understanding  the  idea  that  the  Author  of 
true  religion  disavows  his  almighty  power  on  one 
occasion,  and  asserts  it  on  another?  But,  in  fact, 
we  are  not  reduced  by  the  texts  in  question  to  any 
such  dilemma  :  for  the  passage  quoted  from   Isaiah 


121 


Ixiii.  [5])  has  no  more  allusion  to  Jesus  than  to  Mose- 
or  Joshua.  Whence,  and  under  what  plea,  the  Edi- 
tor and  others  apply  this  passage  to  Christ,  I  am 
quite  at  a  loss  to  know.  The  prophet  here  speaks 
of  the  destruction  of  Edom  and  Bozrah,  under  the 
wrath  of  God,  for  their  infidelity  towards  Israel. 
These  places  were  inhabited  by  the  sons  of  Esau, 
(the  brother  of  Jacob,)  who  was  also  called  Edom. 
Gen.  XXV.  30 :  "  And  Esau  said  to  Jacob,  Feed  me, 
1  pray  thee,  with  that  same  red  pottage,  for  I  am 
faint :  therefore  was  his  name  called  Edom."  So 
Jeremiah  prophesies  the  destruction  of  Edom  and 
Bozrah  (xlix.  7  [8]):  "Concerning  Edom,  thus  saith 
the  Lord  of  Hosts,  Is  wisdom  no  more  in  Teman? 
Is  council  perished  from  the  prudent?  Is  their  wis- 
dom vanished  ?  Flee  ye,  turn  back,  dwell  deep,  O 
inhabitants  of  Dcdan ;  for  I  will  bring  the  calamity 
of  Esau  upon  him,  the  time  that  I  will  visit  him." 
Ver.  L3  :  "For  I  have  sworn  by  myself,  saith  the 
Lord,  that  Bozrah  shall  become  a  desolation,  a  re- 
proach, a  waste,  and  a  curse,  and  all  the  cities  there- 
of shall  be  perpetual  wastes."  And  also  the  whole 
of  Obadiah's  Prophecy  foretells  the  slaughter  of 
Edom  by  the  w  rath  of  God.  I  quote  here  only  one 
or  two  verses  (8,  9)  ;  "  Shall  I  not  in  that  day,  saith 
the  Lord,  even  destroy  the  wise  men  out  of  Edom, 
and  understanding  out  of  the  mount  of  Esau  ?  And 
thy  mighty  men,  O  Teman,  shall  be  dismayed,  to  the 
end  that  every  one  of  the  mount  of  Esau  may  be 
cut  ofT  by  slaughter."  Ver.  11  :  "In  the  day  that 
thou  stoodest  on  the  other  side  ;  in  the  day  that  the 
-^trangers  carried  away  captive    his  forces,  and  for- 

1«) 


\; 


A 


•f 


\ 


eigiiers  cutered  into  his  ^ate,  and  cast  lots  upon  Je- 
rusalem, even  thou  wast  as  one  of  them."  What 
expression  does  Isaiah  make  use  of  in  ch.  Ixiii.  that 
tlie  passage  can  be  interpreted  as  speaking  the  lan- 
o-uao-e  of  Jesus?    Nothins:  of  the   kind   that    1    can 

of?  *^ 

perceive.      It  contains  rather  such  denunciations    as 
are    considered   totally    inconsistent    with    the   oHicc 
and  character  of  the  meek  and  lowly  Jesus,  the  mes- 
senger of  peace  on  earth  and  good-will  in  heaven  to- 
wards men.     Can  the  following  expressions,  "  I  will 
tread  them  in  my  anger,"  "  Their    blood  shall   be 
upon  my  garment,"   (ver.  3,)   be   ascrihcd   to   Jesus, 
who  so  far   from  treading  down  the   inhabitants  of 
Edom  and  Bozrah,  or  of  any  other  land,  and  sprin- 
klino-  their  blood  upon  his  garment,  came  to  reconcile 
them  to  God,  and  labored  in  behalf  of  them,  and  of 
all  men ;  even  suffeiing  his   own    blood   to  be  shed, 
rather  than  refrain  from  teaching  them   the  way  of 
salvation?    What    particular    connexion    had   Jesus 
with  the   destruction  of  the  sons  of   the  children  of 
Edom,  to  justify  the  Editor  in   referring  ch.  Ixiii.  to 
the  Messiah?   I  should  expect  to  fmd  such  language 
as    is   used  by  Isaiah    in  that   chapter  referring  to 
God;  for  in  the  poetical    language  of  the  prophets, 
similar   expressions   are   abundantly  ascribed  to  the 
Most  High  in  an  allegorical  sense.  Isaiah  lix.  15 — 17  : 
*'  And  the  Lord  saw  it,  and  it   displeased   him  that 
tliere  was    no  judgment.     And  he  saw  that  there 
was  no  man^  and  wondered  that  there  was  no  inter- 
cessor :  therefore  his  arm  brought  salvation  unto  lihn, 
and  his  righteousness,  it  sustained  him.     For  he  put 
on  righteousness  as  a  breast-plate,  and  an  helmet  of 


n- 


123 

salvation   upon  his  head;  and  he  put  on  gar r, tents  of' 
vengeance  for  clothing,   and  was  clad   with  zeal  as  a 
cloak.''     Daniel  vii.  9  :    "I  beheld    till   the    thrones 
were   cast  down,   and   the  Ancient  of  days   did  sit, 
whose  garment  was  white  as  snow." 

As  to  Rev.  i.  8,  let  us  refer  to  the  contexts,  com- 
mencing with  verse  4.  In  this,  John  addressing  the 
seven  churches  of  Asia,  says,  "  Grace  be  unto  you, 
and  peace  from  him  which  is,  and  w^hich  w^as,  and 
w^hich  is  to  come  ;  and  from  the  seven  spirits  which 
are  before  his  throne;  and  from  Jesus  Christ."  He 
proceeds  to  describe  Christ  as  a  "  faithful  witness,  the 
first-begotten  of  the  dead,  and  the  Prince  of  the 
kings  of  the  earth,"  adding,  "Unto  him  that  loved 
us,  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood, 
and  hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God  and 
his  Father;  to  him  be  glory  and  dominion  forever 
and  ever.  Amen.  Behold,  he  cometh  with  clouds, 
and  every  eye  shall  see  him,  and  they  also  which 
pierced  him  :  and  all  kindreds  of  the  earth  shall  wail 
because  of  him.  Even  so.  Amen."  Havino-  thus 
stated  wliat  Christ  had  done,  and  is  to  do,  John  re- 
verts to  the  declaration  of  the  eternity  of  God,  with 
which  he  commenced:  "I  am  Alpha  and  Omeo-a, 
the  beginning  and  the  ending,  saith  the  Lord  ;  which 
is,  and  which  was,  and  which  is  to  come,  the  Almigh- 
ty." All  this  appears  so  very  plain ;  the  eternal 
attributes  of  the  Almighty,  in  verse  4,  are  so  distinct 
from  the  description  of  the  character  and  office  of 
Christ  in  verses  5 — 7 ;  the  identity  of  the  definition 
of  God  in  ver.  4,  with  that  in  ver.  8,  is  so  obvious; 
that    I   should   have   thought  it  impossible   for  anv 


/ 


124 


[one]  not  to  perceive  how  totally  inicoiiiiccted  xeim, 
8  is  with  that  which  precedes  it,  and  how  far  it  was 
from  John's  intention  to  declare  the  Almighty,  and 
his  faithful  witness,  to  be  one.  Moreover,  we  find 
the  term  "  Almighty"  in  the  book  of  Revelation 
mentioned  seven  times,  besides  in  verse  8,  and  re- 
ferring always  to  God;  at  the  same  time,  notwith- 
standing the  frequent  mention  of  the  Lamb  or  Jesus, 
throughout  the  whole  book,  neither  the  term  "Al- 
mighty," nor  the  designation  "  who  is,  and  who  was? 
and  is  to  come,"  equivalent  to  the  term  "  Jehovah," 
is  once  ascribed  to  the  Lamb.  Let  the  candid  reader 
judge  for  himself. 

The  Editor  again  introduces  the  subject  of  the 
angel  of  Bokim,  (page  565,)  quoting  Psalm  Ixxviii. 
[13,]  "He  divided  the  sea,  and  caused  them  to  pass 
through,  and  made  the  waters  to  stand  in  a  heap,'' 
&c.  Whence  he  concludes  that  the  Son  was  with 
Israel  in  the  Wilderness  as  their  God.  But  what 
allusion  this  Psalm  has  to  Christ,  situated  cither  in 
the  Wilderness,  or  in  an  uninhabited  land,  my  limited 
understanding  is  unable  to  discover.  As  I  have  al- 
ready noticed  the  argument  adduced  by  the  Editor 
respecting  angels,  in  the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  I 
will  not  renew  the  subject,  but  beg  my  reader's  at- 
tention to  that  part  of  my  treatise. 

The  Editor  quotes  Psalm  xcv.  [6,  7,]  "  For  Jeho- 
vah is  a  great  God,  and  a  great  King  above  all  gods. 
O  come,  let  us  worship  and  bow  down,  let  us  kneel 
before  Jehovah  our  Maker;  for  he  is  our  God,  and 
we  are  the  people  of  his  pasture,  and  the  sheep  of 
his  hand  ;"  and  justifies  the  application  of   this  pas- 


125 

>ao'e  to  Jesus,  upon  the  ground  that,  in  John  i.  3, 
Jesus  is  declared  equally  with  the  Father  to  be  the 
Maker  of  all  things.  I  wonder  at  the  Editor's 
choosing  this  passage  as  being  applicable  to  Jesus, 
on  such  a  basis;  for  should  this  reason  be  admitted 
as  well-founded,  all  the  passages  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, in  which  Jehovah  is  mentioned,  would  be  in- 
terpreted as  referring  to  Jesus  without  selection. 
As  I  noticed  this  verse  of  John  i.  3,  and  one  or  two 
similar  verses  in  page  91,  92, 1  will  not  recur  to  them 
here. 

Having  also  noticed  Psalm  ii.  [12,]  (page  103,) 
"  Blessed  are  all  they  who  trust  in  him,"  1  will  abstain 
from  reiterating  the  same  subject,  though  I  find  the 
Editor   repeating   his  arguments    here   in  his    usual 

manner. 

To  my  great  surprise  I  observe  that  the  Editor 
again  quotes  John  x.  30,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one," 
to  shew  that  God  and  Jesus,  though  they  are  two 
beings,  yet  are  one,  without  any  attention  to  all  the 
illustrations  I  adduced  to  explain  this  passage  in  the 
Second  Appeal  (page  162).  I  will,  however,  eluci- 
date this  passage  still  more  fully  in  its  proper  place. 
I  thank  the  Rev.  Editor  for  quoting  such  passages 
as  Psalms  Ixxxi.  9,  10,  and  Ixxxiii.  18,  which,  in  com- 
mon with  all  other  authorities  of  the  sacred  books, 
decidedly  prove  the  unity  of  the  Supreme  Being,  and 
that  no  other  being,  except  him,  is  worthy  to  be  call- 
ed Jehovah. 

In  the  course  of  the  quotation  from  the  Psalms, 
the  Editor  cites  Heb.  iii.  3,  4:  "For  this  man  was 
counted  worth v  of  more  ijlorv  *han  Moses,  inasmuch 


'•I , 
4. 


i  f.. 


IS. 


V26 

as  he  who  hath  buildcd  the  house  is  worthy  of  more 
honor  than  the  house.  For  every  house  is  built  by 
some  man;  but  he  who  built  all  things  is  God."  Up- 
on which  he  comments,  that  it  was  Christ  that  built 
the  house  understood,  (as  he  supposes,)  from  the 
phrase  "  all  things"  in  the  verse  in  question.  I  will 
not  prolong  the  discussion  by  pointing  out  the  errors 
appearing  in  the  English  version.  I  only  repeat 
verse  6,  explaining  what  the  apostle  meant  by  the 
house  of  Christ,  which  the  Editor  omitted  to  men- 
tion ;  to  wit,  "  But  Christ  as  a  son  over  his  own  house, 
whose  house  arc  we,'''*  Hence  it  is  evident,  that  the 
house  which  Christ  built  by  the  will  of  the  Father 
is  the  Christian  church  ;  and  that  God,  the  Feather 
of  Jesus  and  of  the  rest  of  the  universe,  is  the  author 
of  all  things  whatsoever. 


SECTION   If. 

The  Proplids. 

In  introducing  the  Prophets,  the  Rev.  Editor 
commences  with  Proverbs;  saying,  "If  in  this  book 
Christ  be  represented  under  the  character  of  wis- 
dom, as  divines  have  thought,  and  as  seems  implied 
in  Christ's  saying.  Matt.  xi.  19,  "  But  wisdom  is  justi- 
fied of  her  children;'  and  Luke  xi.  49,  'Therefore 
said  the  wisdom  of  God,  I  will  send  them  prophets,' 
fresh  proof  is  here   furnished    to  the    eternal   deity 


127 

of  the  Son."     He  then  quotes  Prov.  viii.  1,  22,  27, 
30:  "  Doth  not   wisdom  cry?  The   Lord  possessed 
me  in  the  beginning  of  his  way,  before  his  works  of 
old.      When  he    prepared  the  heavens,  I  was  there. 
I  was  by  him,  as  one  brought  up^  with  him :  I   was 
daily  his  delight,  rejoicing  always  before  him."     It  is, 
indeed,  astonishing  to  me  how  the  strong  prejudice 
of  other  learned  divines,  as  well  as  of  the  Editor,  in 
favor  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  has  prevented 
them  from  perceiving  that  the  identification  attempt- 
ed to  be  thus  deduced  by  them,  from  those  passages 
of  the  book  of  Proverbs,  instead  of  proving  the  "  eter- 
nal deity"  of  Jesus,  or  his  self-existence,  would  go  to 
destroy  his  distinct  existence  altogether;  for  Chris- 
tians of  all  denominations  agree  that  wisdom^  under' 
standing,  and  all  other  attributes  of  God,  have  been 
from  eternity  to  eternity  in  the  possession  of  the  al- 
mighty power,  without  either  or  any  of  them  having 
been  endowed  with  a  separate  existence  ;  and  were 
we  to  attribute  to  each    of  the    properties  of  God 
*;elf-existence,  we  must  necessarily  admit   that  there 
are    besides  God  numerous  beings,  (his  attributes,) 
which  possess,  like  God  himself,  eternal  existence — 
a  doctrine  which  would  amount  to  gross  Polytheism. 
But  the  expression,  "  The  Lord  possessed  me  in  the 
beginning  of  his  way,"  (ver.  22,  quoted  by  the   Edi- 
tor,) proves  that  the  wisdom   there  alluded  to  was 
considered  as  in  possession  of  Jehovah,   just  as  his 
other  attributes  are.     If  Jesus,  then,  be  meant  here 
by  wisdom,  he  must,  so  far  from  being  esteemed  as 

*  110  J^  '"  ^'^^  original  Hebrew  does  not  signify  "  brought  up."     It 
"  steadied,"  stabled,  or  established,  as  qualities  with  substances.     Sec 


means 
e  Park- 


burst's  Hebrew  Lexicon. 


A' 


I 


I, 


ail 


'*■"?''  • 


/ 


128 


Jehovah  himself,  be  supposed  to  have  been  jwsse^scd 
by  Jehovah  as  an  attribute.  If  this  doctrine  be  ad- 
mitted as.  orthodox,  how  then  are  tlie  primitive 
Christians  to  be  justified  in  condemninoj  Sabelhus  on 
account  of  liis  maintrjriiniJ:  the  same  doctrine  ?  We 
iind  that,  consistently  with  the  same  prophetical  lan- 
guage, the  inspired  writer  of  Proverbs  directs  us  to 
call  wisdom  a  sister^  and  understanding  kins-woman^ 
(vii.  4,)  instead  of  bestowing  on  her  such  epithets 
as,  Jehovah,  the  everlasting  God^  that  are  insisted 
upon  bj  the  Editor  as  properly  applied  to  Jesus.  In 
fact,  the  book  of  Proverbs  meant  only  to  urge,  in 
the  usual  poetical  style  x)f  expression,  the  necessity 
of  adhering  to  wisdom,  both  in  religious  and  social 
life,  strengthening  the  exhortation  by  pointing  out 
that  all  the  works  of  God  are  founded  upon  wisdom. 
If  such  poetical  personifications  as  are  found  in  tlio 
Prophets,  as  well  as  in  profane  Asiatic  works  in  com- 
mon circulation,  were  to  be  noticed,  a  separate  vo- 
luminous work  would,  I  am  afraid,  fail  to  contain 
them.  And  if  the  abstract  attributes  of  God,  such  as 
wisdom,  mercy,  truth,  benevolence,  <Scc.  are  to  be  es- 
leemed  as  separate  deities,  on  account  of  their  being 
sometimes  personified,  and  declared  eternal,  and  as- 
sociating with  God,  this  mode  of  literal  interpretation 
would,  I  admit,  be  so  far  advantageous  to  the  cause 
of  the  Editor  as  respects  the  refutation  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  unity  of  God,  but  would  not  be  precise- 
ly favorable  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  as  it 
would  certainly  extend  the  number  of  personified 
deities  much  beyond  three.  Take,  for  example,  the 
following  passages,  which  personifv  the  attributes  oi 


129 

God,  and  ascribe  to  them  eternity,  and  association 
with  God.  Psalm  cxxx.  7  :  "  With  the  Lord  there  is 
mercy,  and  with  iiim  is  plenteous  redemption." 
Ixxxv.  10:  "Mercy  and  truth  are  met  together; 
righteousness  and  peace  have  kissed  each  other." 
Numbers  xvi.  46:  "  There  is  wrath  gone  out  from 
the  Lord."  Here  we  have  mercy,  redemption, 
truth,  and  wrath,  all  spoken  of  as  separate  existenc- 
es. Are  we,  therefore,  to  consider  them  as  per- 
sons of  the  Godhead  ?  As  abstract  qualities  are 
often  represented  in  the  Scriptures,  and  in  Asiatic 
writings  generally,  as  persons  and  agents,  to  render 
ideas  familiar  to  the  understanding,  so  real  existenc- 
es are  intended  sometimes  under  the  appellation  of 
abstract  qualities,  for  the  sake  of  energy  of  expres- 
sion. In  1  John  iv.  8,  God  is  declared  to  be.  mere 
love,  John  i.  1,  Jesus  is  called  word,  or  revelation. 
1  Cor.  i.  24,  .30,  Christ  is  represented  as  power  and 
wisdom,  &c.  2  Cor.  v.  21,  true  Christians  are  declar- 
ed to  be  wisdom  in  Christ ;  and  Israel  is  said  to  be 
an  astonishment  in  Deut.  xxviii.  37,  and  curse  in  Zech. 
viii.  13  ;  Abraham  to  be  blessing  in  Gen.  xii.  2  ;  and 
Jehovah  is  declared  to  be  glory  in  Zech.  ii.  5.  But 
every  unprejudiced  mind  is  convinced  that  these  al- 
legorical terms  neither  can  alter  the  fact,  nor  can 
Ihey  change  the  nature  of  the  unity  of  God,  and  of 
the  dependence  of  his  attributes. 

After  this  no  further  remark  seems  necessary  on 
tlie  passages  quoted  by  the  Editor,  from  Matthew 
and  Luke,  where,  as  in  many  other  passages  in  which 
the  word  Wisdom  is  to  be  found,  the  sense  neither 

17 


Ii 


M 


\i 


J 


f 


t 

i  I 


/ 


130 


requires,  nor  even  admits,  of  our  understanding  Jesus 
to  be  meant  under  that  appellation. 

The  Editor  quotes  Isaiah  vi.  1,  10,  relating  to  the 
Prophet's  vision  of  God  ;  he  then  comments,  "  As 
this  glorious  vision,  wherein  the  prophet  received 
his  commission,  represented  either  the  Father  or  the 
Son,  we  might  have  expected  thai  it  should  be  the 
Son,  who  had  undertaken  to  redeem  men."  The 
Editor  afterwards  quotes  John  xii.  41,  "  These  things 
said  Isaiah,  when  he  saw  his  glory  and  spoke  of 
him,"  and  considers  these  words  as  decisive  testimo- 
ny of  the  opinion,  that  it  was  the  Son  who  was  seeu 
by  the  prophet  in  the  vision. 

Let  us  first  impartially  refer  to  the  context  of 
verse  41  of  John.  We  fmd  in  the  verse  a  personal 
pronoun  used  three  times.  The  first,  "  he,"  in  the 
phrase  "  when  he  saw,"  though  understood  in  the 
Greek  verb  «(?* ;  the  second,  "  his,"  connected 
with  the  word  "glory;"  and  the  third,  "of  him," 
after  the  verb  "spoke;"  thus — "when  he  saw  his 
glory  and  spoke  of  him,'''  The  first  pronoun,  "  he," 
of  course  refers  to  Isaiah,  mentioned  just  before  it. 
The  second  and  the  third,  "  his"  and  "  of  him,"  can 
have  no  reference  to  Isaiah,  for  the  words  "  when 
Isaiah  saw  Isaiah's  glory,  and  spoke  of  Isaiah,"  could 
bear  no  sense  whatever.  These  two  last  pronouns 
must,  therefore,  have  reference  to  some  pronoun  or 
noun  to  be  found  in  the  immediately  preceding  part 
of  the  passage.  We  accordingly  find,  from  the  pre- 
ceding verse,  (40,)  that  these  pronouns  refer  to  Je- 
hovah, the  God  of  hosts,  mentioned  twice  in  verse 
38,  whose  glory  Isaiah  saw,  and  in  whose   behalf  he 


131 

spoke,  without  mention  of  the  Son  being  once  made 
between  verses  38  and  41.  The  passage  thus  stands, 
(ver.  38,)  He  (Isaiah)  spoke,  "  Lord,  who  hath  be- 
lieved our  report?  and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of  the 
Lord  been  revealed  ?"  (39,)  "  Therefore,  they  could 
not  believe  [because]  that  Isaiah  said  again,"  (40,) 
"//c  hath  blinded  their  eyes,  and  hardened  their 
heart  ;"  (41,)  "These  things,  said  Isaiah,  when  he 
saw  his  glory,  and  spake  of  him.'''  Isaiah  must  have 
then  seen  the  glory  of  him  in  whose  behalf  he  spoke; 
a  fact  which  neither  party  can  dispute  ;  and,  as  it  is 
evident  from  the  preceding  verse,  (40,)  and  from 
Isaiah  vi.  [10,]  that  he  spoke  of  God,  who  hlindcd 
the  eyes  of  the  Jews  and  hardened  their  hearts,  it 
necessarily  follows,  that  he  saw  the  glory  of  that 
very  being  spoken  of  by  Isaiah,  For  further  illus- 
tration of  God's  being  often  declared  to  have  blinded 
their  eyes  and  hardened  their  hearts,  I  quote  Rom. 
xi.  7,  8:  "  What  then?  Israel  hath  not  obtained  that 
which  he  seeketh  for ;  but  the  election  hath  obtain- 
ed it,  and  the  rest  were  blinded,  (According  as  it  is 
written,  God  hath  given  them  the  spirit  of  slumber; 
eyes  that  they  should  not  see,  and  ears  that  they  should 
not  hear,)  unto  this  day."  Isaiah  Ixiii.  17  :  "  O  Lord, 
why  hast  thou  made  us  to  err  from  thy  ways,  and 
hardened  our  heart  from  thy  fear?  Return,  for  thy 
servants'  sake,  the  tribe  of  thy  inheritance."  From 
vers.  38 — 41,  as  already  observed,  is  not  a  single  noun 
or  a  pronoun  that  can  have  allusion  to  Jesus.  But 
we  find,  in  verse  42,  the  pronoun  "  him,"  implying 
the  Son  as  absolutely  required  by  the  sense,  in  ref- 
erence to  verse  37,  and  in  consistence  with  verse  44, 


!t^ 


r 


.  w 


m 


J 


i 

i 

I 


4, 


^; 


/ 


J  32. 

in  wliicli  the  name  of  Jesus  is  found  mentioned.  As 
all  the  Pharisees  believed  in  God,  as  well  as  in  Isaiah, 
one  of  their  prophets,  the  text  could  convey  no  mean- 
in*^,  if  the  plirase  "Nevertheless  among  the  chief 
rulers  also  many  believed  in  him"  were  admitted  to 
bear  reference  either  to  God  or  Isaiah. 

If  it  be  insisted  upon,  in  defiance  of  all  the  forego- 
ing explanation,  that  the  two  last-mentioned  pronouns, 
in  verse  41,  "  When  he  saw  his  glory  and  spake  of 
him,"  are  applied  to  Jesus,  the  passage  in  the  evan- 
gelist would  be,  in  that  case,  more  correctly  explain- 
ed by  referring  it  to  John  viii.  56,  "  Your  father  Abra- 
ham rejoiced  to  see  my  day,"  which  cannot  be  under- 
stood of  ocular  vision,  but  prophetic  anticipation; 
whereas  the  glory  seen  in  the  vision  of  Isaiah,  was 
that  of  God  himself  in  the  delivery  of  the  command 
given  to  the  prophet  on  that  occasion,  as  I  observed 
in  the  Second  Appeal  (page  286.)  With  a  view  to 
invalidate  this  interpretation,  the  Editor  inquires, 
(page  569,)  "What  has  Abraham's  day  to  do  with 
Isaiah's  vision  ?"  In  answer  to  which  J  must  allow 
that  Abraham's  day  had  nothing  to  do  with  Isaiah's 
vision,  except  that  as  Abraham  saw  the  day  of  Christ, 
(properly  speaking,  the  reign  of  Christ,)  by  prophet- 
ic anticipation,  and  not  through  ocular  vision,  (John 
viii.  56,)  so  Isaiah,  as  another  prophet  of  God,  must 
have  seen  the  glory  of  Christ  (if  he  had  seen  it  at  all) 
through  the  same  prophetic  anticipation,  and  must 
have  spoken  of  Christ's  commission  (if  he  had  spok- 
en of  him  at  all)  through  the  same  prophetic  power: 
the  reference,  therefore,  is  one  which  goes  to  prove, 
that  whenever  the  prophets,  such  as  Abraham,  Isa- 


133 

jah,  or  any  other  prophets,  are  declared  to  have 
seen  or  spoken  of  future  events,  they  must  have 
seen  or  spoken  of  them  through  the  prophetic  pow- 
er vested  in  them  by  God.  I  never  attempted  to 
prove,  that  the  words  "  day"  and  "  glory"  are  sy- 
nonymous, nor  did  I  declare  that  Isaiah  saw  the  day 
of  Christ,  that  the  Editor  should  have  occasion  to 
advance  that  "  it  is  not  the  day  of  Christ  which  the 
evangelist  describes  Isaiah  as  having  seen,  but  his 
glory."  However,  I  cannot  help  being  of  opinion, 
that  in  such  phrases,  on  particular  occasions,  as  "  He 
saw  the  day  of  the  king  Messiah,"  or  "  He  saw  the 
glory  of  the  king  Messiah,"  the  words  "  day"  and 
"glory"  amount  almost  to  the  same  thing.  My  lim- 
ited understanding  cannot,  like  the  Editor's,  discover 
how  "  Isaiah  fixes  the  time  when  he  thus  saw  Christ's 
glory,  even  when  it  was  said,  '  he  hath  blinded  their 
eyes,'"  &:c.,  for  I  find  the  Jews  were  from  time  to 
time  charged,  by  several  of  the  prophets,  with  diso- 
bedience, and  with  having  been  blinded  and  harden- 
ed. Deut.  xxviii.  28 :  "  The  Lord  shall  smite  thee 
with  madness,  and  blindness^  and  astonishment  of 
heart."  xxix.  4  :  "  The  Lord  hath  not  given  you  an 
heart  to  perceive,  and  eyes  to  see,  and  ears  to  hear^ 
unto  this  day."  1  Kings  xviii.  37:  "Hear  me,  O 
Lord,  hear  me,  that  this  people,  may  know  that  thou 
art  the  Lord  God,  and  that  thou  hast  turned  their 
heart  back  again:'  Isaiah  Ixiii.  17,  as  noticed  before. 
The  Editor  refers  to  the  prophet  Isaiah,  (pp. 
533,  570,)  saying,  that  Isaiah,  in  ch.  vii.  "  predicting 
the  birth  of  Christ,  identifies  his  divine  and  his  hu- 
man  nature,   'Behold,  a  virgin  shall   conceive,   and 


** 


I 


t^n 


t 


•  im 


/ 


1 34 

bear  a  son,  and  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel.'  This 
passage  the  Holy  Spirit  applies  to  Christ  in  Matt.  i. 
22,  23."  He  regrets  my  applying  the  above  verse 
to  Hezekiah,  in  an  immediate  sense,  though  totally 
unable  to  reject  the  proof  of  such  application,  de- 
duced by  me,  in  my  vSecond  Appeal,  from  its  con- 
text, and  from  the  sacred  historv.  He  rests  his  re- 
jection  entirely  upon  the  |)hrase,  "  A  virgin  shall 
conceive,"  found  in  the  English  version,  as  being  used 
in  the  future  tense,  on  the  ground  that  "  Hezeki- 
ah could  not  have  been  the  child  at  the  time  about 
to  be  conceived  by  the  virgin,  for  this  plain  reason, 
that  God  never  foretels  past  things.  The  birth  of 
Hezekiah  was  not  then  a  thing  to  ^ome  ;  for,  he  was 
at  least  six  years  old  when  this  prophecy  was  spok- 
en.— This  our  author  will  see  by  merely  comparing 
the  fact,  that  Ahaz  reigned  sixteen  years,  and  Heze- 
kiah began  to  reign  when  he  was  five-and-twenty 
years  old.  Hezekiah  must  then  have  been  six,  if 
not  seven,  years  old  when  this  prophecy  was  deliv- 
ered." The  editor,  then,  charges  me  with  having 
expended,  in  vain,  12  pages  on  this,  as  well  as  on  the 
passage  in  ch.  ix.  of  Isaiah.  Here  we  find  again  a 
new  instance,  in  which  a  diligent  study  of  the  Bible, 
for  thirty  or  forty  years,  but  accompanied  with  early 
religious  prejudices,  has  not  been  able  to  save  the 
student  from  making  such  an  error  as  to  take  the 
term  TTSTi^  "  pregnant,"  in  the  original  verse,  in  He- 
brew, as  meaning  absolutely,  "  shall  conceive,"  and 
to  declare,  unthinkingly,  that  "  Hezekiah  could  not  I 
have  been  the  child  at  that  time  to  be  conceived." 
Fiow  will  the   Editor    render  the  same  term  Hin 


135 

found  in  Gen.  xvi.  11,  "Thou  hast  conceived,  or  art 
with  child"  ?  Will  he,  on  his  adopted  principle,  inter- 
pret it,  "  Thou  shalt  conceive  ?"  He  must,  in  that 
case,  overlook  verses  4th  and  5th  of  the  same  chapter, 
which  testify  Hagar's  having  already  conceived  be- 
fore the  angel  of  the  Lord  had  seen  and  spoken  to 
her,  in  verse  the  11th.     "He  went  in  unto  Hagar, 
and  she  conceived  ;  and  when  she  saw  she  had  con- 
ceived," &;c.  (4.)  "  And  Sarai  said   unto   Abraham, 
My  wrong  be  upon  thee  ;  I  have  given  my  maid  un- 
to thy  bosom  ;  and  when  she  saw  that  she  had  con- 
ceived," &,c.  (5.)  Did  not  the  Editor  ever  reflect  up- 
on Jer.  xxxi.  8,  containing  the  same  terms  Jl^rr,  or 
"  pregnant,"  and  rn^*1>  or  "  bearing,"  as  are  found  in 
Isaiah  vii.    14  ? — a  passage  which  might  have  sug- 
gested to  the  Editor  the  propriety  of  not  makino-  so 
positive  an  assertion,  that  "  Hezekiah  could  not  have 
been  the  child  at  that  time  to  be  conceived."     Did 
the    Editor  entirely  overlook  the  same  term   mr?, 
signifying  pregnant,  in  2  Sam.  xi.  5,  and  Isaiah  xxvi. 
17,  Gen.  xxxviii.  24,  25,  Exodus  xxi.  22,  2  Kino-s  viii. 
12,  Amos  i.   13?     The  fact  is,  that  we  find  in  the 
original    Hebrew,    HD^J^rr?   signifying  "  the   virgin," 
which,  if  not  referred  to  a  particular  person  before- 
mentioned,  implies,  in  the  figurative  language  of  the 
Scripture,  either  a  city,  or  the  people  of  a  city,  as  I 
noticed  in  pages  272,  273,  and  280,  of  my  Second  Ap- 
peal ;    and   also  we  find  il^irr  synonymous  with  the 
participle  "  conceived,"  instead  of  "  shall  conceive." 
The  verse,  therefore,  thus  runs  :  "  Behold,  the  vir- 
gin (the  city  of  Jerusalem,  or  the  nation,)  is  pregnant, 
and  is  bearing  a  son,  and  shall  call  his  name  Imman- 


K. 


^ 


■-> 


m 


< ) 


/ 


1^ 


— r 


/ 


136 

ueV  (14.)  «  For  before  the  child'*  shall  know  lo  re- 
fuse  the  evil,  and  choose  the  good,  the  land  that 
thou  (Ahaz)  abhorrest  shall  be  forsaken  of  both 
her  kings,"  (W,)  i.  e.  Rezin,  the  king  of  Syria,  and 
Pekah,  the  king  of  Israel,  who,  at  that  time,  had 
besieged  Jerusalem,  as  is  evident  from  the  preced- 
ing verses;  and  such  personifying  phrases  as  "op. 
pressed  virgin,"  and  "bring  forth  children,"  are 
found  also  applied  to  the  city,  or  the  people  of  the 
city,  in  the  prophets,  in  other  instances  similar  to 
that  of  Isaiah  vii.  14,  in  question.  Micah  iv.  10: 
"  Be  in  pain,  and  labor  to  brutg  forth,  O  daughter  of 
Zion,  like  a  woman  in  travail."  Isaiah  xxiii.  12: 
"  And  he  said,  Thou  shalt  no  more  rejoice,  O  thou 
oppressed  virgin,  daughter  of  Zidon."  But  unless 
orthodox  authors  changed  "  the  virgin"  into  "  a  vir- 
gin," and  "  conceived"  into  "  shall  conceive,"  they 
could  not  apply  the  verse  in  a  direct  sense  to  Mary, 
the  mother  of  Christ,  and  to  Christ  himself;  and 
consequently,  to  suit  their  convenience,  they  have 
entirely  disregarded  the  original  scripture,  the  con- 
text, and  the  historical  facts. 

In  noticing  my  explanation  of  the  nD^irnf  "  the 
virgin,"  in  the  Second  Appeal,  the  Rev.  Editor 
states,  that  "  It  is  true,  H,  the  emphatic  of  Hebrew, 

•  In  the  17th  year  of  the  reign  of  Pekah,  the  king  of  Israel.  Ahaz  was  bom ; 
and  twenty  years  old  was  Ahaz  when  he  began  to  reign  in  Jerusalem,  and 
he  reigned  sixteen  years.  2  Kings  xvi.  1,2.  Hence  it  appears,  that  he 
lived  thirty-six  years  only;  and  as  Hezekiah  began  to  reign  after  the  death 
his  fathei  Ahaz,  when  he  was  twenty  and  five  years  old,  (2  Kings  xviii.  2.) 
he  must  have  been  born  when  his  fathei  Ahaz  was  ten,  or  at  most,  eleven 
years  of  age,  which  was  rather  'contrary  to  the  common  course  of  nature. 

t  In  Isaiah  lii.  2,  the  city,  or  the  people  of  the  city,  is  once  called  "a  cap- 
tive daughter ;  inch.  hv.  1,  it  is  once  styled  "barren,"  nnHTV  "  a  har- 
lot" in  Ezek.  xvi.  38,  and  in  other  instances.  T^ 


137 


is  generally  rendered  in  the  Septuagint  by  the  Greek 
article  :  that  they  are  by  no  means  equivalent  in 
value,  however,  he  may  convince  himself  by  referring 
to  that  excellent  work  on  the  Greek  article,  for 
which  the  learned  world  is  indebted  to  Dr.  Middle- 
ton,  the  bishop  of  Calcutta."  I  am  really  sorry  to 
observe  that  the  Editor  should  have  given  such  an 
evasive  answer  to  so  important  a  point ;  he,  howev- 
er, was  obliged  to  do  so,  knowing  that  H  in  He- 
brew, before  a  noun,  as  J  in  x\rabic,  is  invariably 
a  definite  article.  In  his  attempt  to  remove  the  in- 
consistency between  his  maintaining  the  idea  of  the 
deity  of  Jesus,  and  applying  to  him  verses  15  and  16 
in  Isaiah  vii.  by  which  he  is  declared  subject  to  to- 
tal ignorance,  the  Rev.  Editor  attributes  (p.  534) 
such  ignorance  to  the  human  nature  of  Jesus,  forget- 
ting what  he,  in  common  with  other  orthodox  Chris- 
tians, oiFers  as  an  explanation  of  such  passages  as  de- 
clare all  power  in  heaven  and  earth  to  have  been 
given  to  Jesus  by  the  Father  of  the  universe,  whicli 
is,  that  all  power  was  given  him  in  his  human  capac- 
ity, while  in  his  divine  capacity  he  enjoys  indepen- 
dent omnipotence.  Is  not  the  power  of  distinguishing 
good  from  evil  included  in  all  power  ^/vcn  to  Jesus, 
according  to  the  Editor,  in  his  human  capacity  ? 
How,  then,  can  the  Editor  be  justified  in  maintaining 
the  idea  that,  in  his  human  nature,  he,  though  pos 
sessed  of  all  power  in  heaven  and  earth,  wa  unable, 
before  the  age  of  maturity,  to  distinguish  the  good 
from  the  evil,  as  found  in  verses  15  and  16?  I  beor  also 
the  attention  of  tlie  Editor  to  Luke  ii.  46 — M,  shcw- 
'ng  that  Jesus  was  possessed  of  knowledge  of  his  di- 

]8 


i 


hi 


f. 


if 


y 


/ 


138 

vine  commission  even  in  his  early  youth,  and  also  to 
the  Editor's  own  declaration,  (page  536,)  "  The 
spirit  of  the  Lord  was  to  rest  upon  him,  as  the  spir- 
it of  wisdom  and  understanding."  Nothing  but  ear- 
ly  prejudice  can  persuade  a  man  to  believe  that  one 
being  at  one  time  should  be  both  subject  to  total  i<r. 
norance  and  possessed  of  omniscience — two  diamet- 
rically opposite  qualities. 

Let  us  now  refer  to  the  context  of  the  verse  in 
question.    The  first  verse  of  the  same  chapter  speaks 
of  the  king  of  Syria  and  the  king  of  Israel  having  he- 
sieged  Jerusalem;  verses  3  and  4,  of  (he  Lord's  h^vino^ 
sent  Isaiah,  the  prophet,  to  Ahaz,  th -  king  of  Jerusa'^ 
lem,  to  oHer  him  consolation  and  confidence  against 
the  attacks  of  these  two  kings  ;  verses  5  and  6,  of  the 
two  kings  having  taken  evil  counsel  against  Ahaz,  and 
of  their  determination  to  set  the  son  of  Tabeal  on  his 
throne  ;    verses    8  and    9   foretell  the  total  fall   of 
Ephraim  (the  ten  tribes  of  Israelites  who  separated 
from  Judah,    which   comprised    the   two  remaining 
tribes)  and  of  Samaria  within  three  score  and  five 
years;  verses  10  and  11  mention  the  Lord's  olfe  ring 
to  Ahaz  a  sign,  which  he  (verses  12  and  13)  declined  ; 
verses  14-16  contain  the  Lord's  promise  to  give  spon- 
taneously a  sign  of  the  destruction  of  Ahaz's  enemies 
in  the  person  of  the  son  borne  by  the  virgin  of  Je- 
rusalem ;  the  delivery  of  Judah  from  these  two  kings 
before  the   child  should   become  of  age  ;  verse  17, 
and  following  verses,  foretell  what  wa^to  happen  in 
Judah,  bringing  the  king  of    Assyria  in  opposition  to 
the  kings  of  Syria  and  of  Israel,  who  were  then  ini- 
raical  to  the  house  of   David.     The  first  four  verses 


f 


139 

of  chap.  viii.  speak  of  the  birth  of   a  son  to  Isaiah, 
the  prophet,  and  of  the  depredations  by  the  Assyri- 
ans on  the  land  of   Damascus,  the  capital   of  Svria, 
and  on  the  land  of  Samaria,  the  head  of  Ephraim, 
before  that  son  should  have  know  ledge  to  cry,  "  My 
father  and  my  mother."      Hence   it   is    evident   that 
the  child  mentioned  in  ch.  vii.   verse   14,  called   Im*. 
manuel,  was  much  older  than  the   child  mentioned 
ch.  viii.  3;  for  the  attacks  upon  Syria  and  Israel  by 
the  Assyrians  took  place  only  before  the  former  be- 
came of  age  to  know  right  from   wrong,  but  while 
the  latter  was  still  unable  to  pronounce  a  single  word 
Verse  6  speaks  of  the  army  of  Rczin,  and   of  the 
son  of  Remaliah,  the  kings  of  Syria  and  Israel,  hav 
ing  refused  the  soft   waters  of   Shiloah,*  a   river  in 
Judah,  figuratively  meaning   peace  ;  verses  7  and  8, 
of  the  Lord's  declaring  that  he  would  brino-  into  the 
land  of  Immanuel,  upon  these  invaders,  the   strong 
waters  of  the  river,  (hat  is,  the  armies  of  the  king 
of  Assyria  ;  verses  9   and  10,  of  the  combination  of 
the  people  against  the  king  of  Judah,  which  turned 
to  their  own  destruction,  for  the  sake  of  Immanuel. 
It  is  w^orth  noticing,  that  the  last  word  in    verse   10, 
is  translated  in  the  English  version,  "  God  is  with  us," 
instead  of^leaving  it,  as  it  is  in  the  original  Hebrew, 
"  Immanuel,"  though  in  two  other  instances  (ch.  vii. 
14,  and  ch.  viii.  8)  the  word  "  Immanuel"  is  left  un- 
changed as  it  stands  in  the  original.    Verses  1 1 — 17, 
pronounce  the  Lord's  displeasure  at  the  disobedience 
of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  advising  them  to  fear   the 

Shiloh,  found  in  Gen.  xlix.  10.  implying  a  redeemer,  differs  in  significa- 
Uon.  and  also  in  spelling,  from  the  word  «  Shiloah,"  herein  menUoned  as  sig- 
nifying rivers  :  in  Genesis,  ,1^^:^  in  Isaiah  viii.  6,  H^C- 


tr  I 


I 


>4" 


t 


:', 


M 


ii^ 


/ 


140 


Lord,  and  not  fear  the  confederacy  of  the  kinfijs  of 
Syria  and  Israel.     Verse  18  declares  the  Lord's  hav- 
ing given  the  prophet  and  the  children  for  signs  and 
for  wonders  in  Israel  ;  and  the  remaining  verses  of 
this  chapter  speak  of  false  prophets,  of  the  misera- 
ble situation  of  the  Israelites — a  fact  which  is  fully 
related  in  the  2d  book  of  Kings,  xvi.  ^ :  "  Then  Re- 
zin,  king  of  Syria,  and  Pekah,  son  of  Reraaliah,  king 
of  Israel,  came  up  to  Jerusalem  to  war;  and    they 
besieged  Ahaz,  but  could  not  overcome  him."      Ver. 
6  :  "  At  that  time,  Rezin,  king  of  Syria,  recovered 
Elath  to  Syria,  and  drove  the  Jews  from  Elath  ;  and 
the  Syrians  came  to   Elath,   and    dwelt    there   unto 
this  day."     Ver.  7  :    "So  Ahaz  sent   messengers  to 
Tilgath-Pileser,  king  of  Assyria,  saying,   I  am    thy 
servant  and  thy  son.   Come  up  and  save  me   out  of 
the  hand  of  the  king  of  Syria,  and  out  of  the  hand 
of  the  king  of  Israel,  which  rise  up  against  me."    Ver. 
8:  "  And  Ahaz  took  the  silver   and   gold    that  was 
found  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  in  the  treasures 
of  the  king's  house,  and  sent  it  for   a  present  to  the 
king  of  Assyria."     Ver.  9:  "  And  the    king  of  Assy- 
ria hearkened  unto  him  :  for  the  king  of  Assyria  went 
up  against  Damascus,  and  took   it,   and  carried  the 
people  of  it  captive  to  Kir,  and  slew  ReziiV 

It  is  now  left  to  the  public  to  reflect  seriously  on 
the  above  circumstances  stated  in  the  context,  and 
to  pronounce  whether  thereby  it  appears  that  verse 
14  is  originally  applied  to  Hezekiah,  the  son  and  heir 
of  Ahaz,  king  of  Jerusalem,  a  child  born  before  the 
defeat  of  his  enemies,  the  Immanuel,  whose  land  was 
Judah ;  or  to  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  born  at  least  r)00 


141 

years  afterwards:  and  also  to  decide  whether  or  not 
the  land  which  Ahaz   abhorred,  had   been  forsaken 
by  the  king  of  Syria  and  of  Israel,  from  the  interfer- 
ence   of    the   king    of    Assyria,    before    Hezekiah 
came  to  years  of  discretion ;  or  whether  that  event 
took  place  only  after  the  birth  of  Jesus.     As  to  the 
application  of  ve/'se  4  to  Jesus  Christ,  by  St.  Matthew, 
my  language  in  the  Second  Appeal   was,  that  "  the 
evangelist  Matthew  referred  in  his  Gospel  to  ch.  yii. 
14  of  Isaiah,  merely  for  the  purpose  of  accommoda- 
tion; the  son  of  Ahaz  and    the  Saviour   resembling 
each  other,   in  each    being    the    means,    at  different 
periods,    though  in   different   senses,  of  establishing 
the    throne  of  the    house  of   David.     In   the   same 
manner,  the  apostles  referred   to  Hosea  xi.  1,  in  ch. 
II.  15  of   his  Gospel,  and   in    many  other  instances." 
Nevertheless,    the    Rev.   Editor    charges  me   with 
having  blasphemed  against  the  word  of  God,  by  at- 
tempting to   persuade  him  and   others,  in  my  expla- 
nation of  the  above  verse,  "that  the  evangelist  Mat- 
thew   ought   not  to  be  credited."     I,  indeed,   never 
expected  such  an  accusation  from  the    Editor.     To 
acquit  myself  of  the  charge,  I  entreat  my  readers  to 
refer  to   the  translation  of  the  four  Gospels   by  Dr. 
Campbell,  a  celebrated  Trinitarian  writer,  in  whose 
notes  (page  9)   that  learned  divine  says,  "  Thus  ch. 
li.  15,  a  declaration  from  the  prophet  Hosea  xi.    J 
which  God  made  in  relation  to  the  people  of  Israel' 
whom  he  had  long    before  called  from  Egypt,  is  ap-' 
plied  by  the  historian  allusively  to  Jesus  Christ,  where 
all  that  is  meant  is,  that  with  equal  truth,  or  rather, 
with  much  greater  energy  of  signification,  God  might 


* 


% 

i 


!i- 


> 


/ 


142 


now  say,  I  have  recalled  my  son  out  of  Eirypt.  In- 
deed, the  import  of  the  Greek  phrase,  as  commonly 
used  by  the  sacred  writers,  is  no  more,  as  l^e  Clerc 
has  justly  observed,  than  that  such  words  of  any  of 
the  prophets  may  be  aj)plied  with  truth  to  such  an 
event." 

Did  these  orthodox  writers  also  attempt  to  per- 
suade people  to  discredit  the  evangelical  writings  by 
applying  Hosea  xi.  1,  originally  to  Israel,  and  allu- 
sively to  Jesus  Christ?  The  Editor  will  not,  I  pre- 
sume, get  the  sanction  of  the  public  to  accuse  those 
learned  divines  of  blasphemy.  I  did  no  more  than 
adopt  their  mode  of  expression  in  examining  Isaiah 
vii.  14,  compared  with  Matt.  i.  22,  23^  and  Hosea  xi. 
1,  with  Matt.  ii.  IT);  yet  I  am  charged  with  blas- 
phemy against  the  authority  of  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew.  I  must  repeat  the  very  words  I  used 
in  the  Second  Appeal,  in  comparing  the  book  of 
Hosea  with  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  (pp.  263,  264,) 
that  the  public  may  judge  whether  the  language  of 
the  Editor,  as  to  my  attempt  to  discredit  the  Gos- 
pel, is  just  and  liberal.  "Thus  Matt.  ii.  1.'),  'Out 
of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  son,'  the  evangelist  refers 
to  Hosea  xi.  1,  which,  though  really  applied  to  Isra- 
el, represented  there  as  the  son  of  God,  is  used  by 
the  apostle  in  reference  to  the  Saviour,  in  considera- 
tion of  a  near  resemblance  between  their  circum- 
stances in  this  instance  : — both  Israel  and  Jesus  were 
carried  into  Egypt  and  recalled  from  thence,  and 
both  were  denominated  in  the  Scriptures  the  'Son 
of  God.'  The  passage  of  Hosea  thus  runs  from 
chap.  xi.    1 — 3:  'When   Israel    was  a  child,  then  I 


143 

loved  him,  and  called  my  son  out  of  Egypt.  As  they 
called  them,  so  they  went  from  them  :  they  sacrific- 
ed unto  Baalim,  and  burnt  incense  to  graven  imao-es. 
I  taught  Ephraim  also  to  go,  taking ^them  by  their 
arms;  but  they  know  not  that  1  healed  them;'— in 
which  Israel,  who  is  represented  as  a  child  of  God, 
is  declared  to  have  sacrificed  to  Baalim,  and  to  have' 
burnt  incense  to  graven  images— circumstances  which 
cannot  justly  be  ascribed  to  the  Saviour." 

The  Rev.  Editor,  likewise  in  opposition  to  my  ex- 
planation, applies  Isaiah  ix.  6  to  Jesus:  "  For  unto 
us  a  child   is  boin,  unto  us  a  son   is  given :  and  the 
government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulder:  and  his  name 
shall   be  called   Wonderful,  Counsellor,  the   mighty 
God,   the  everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of  Peace;" 
and   all  that  he   says  (page  534)   in  support  of  his 
referrmg   this   verse   to   the  deity    of  Jesus,    is    in 
these  words  :—"  To  secure  to  Hezekiah   that  pas- 
sage in  ch.  ix.  our  author  gives  us  a  translation,  or 
rather  a  paraphrase  of  it  by  Jonathan,  in   his  Tar- 
gum,  to  which  we  shall  merely  oppose  that  given  by 
Bishop  Lowth."     Can  the  interpretation  of  the  Old 
Testament  given  by  Jonathan  and  other  celebrat- 
ed  Jewish  writers,  some  of  whom  lived  prior  to  the 
birth  of  Jesus,  be  discredited  from  the  authority  of 
one,  or  one  thousand.  Christian  bishops,  to  whom,  at 
any  rate,   Hebrew  is  a   foreign  language?     Can  a 
Innitanan,  m  arguing  with  one  not  belon<Wn-  to  the 
orthodox  sect  and  establishment,  quote   ^^^th''propri. 
ety,  for  the  refutation  of  his  adversary,  the   authori- 
y  of  a  Truutarian  writer?     The  public  mav  be  the 
best  judges  of  these  points.     As  these  Jewish  writ- 


t  » 


•  i;i 


.( ? 


;•  If 


i_ 


/ 


144 


ings  are  not  unprocurable,    the  public  may   refer  to 
them  for  their  own  satisfaction.     Is   there  any  au- 
thority of  the  sacred  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
authorizing  the  Editor  to  apply  Isaiah  ix.  6,  even  in 
an  accommodated  sense,  to  Jesus  ?     I  beheve  noth- 
ing  of  the  kind  : — it  is  mere  enthusiasm  that  has  led 
a  great  many  learned  Trinitarians  to  apply  this  verse 
to  Jesus.     The  Editor  avoided  noticing  the  context, 
and  the    historical  circumstances   which    I   adduced 
in  my  Appeal  to  prove  the  application  of  the  verse 
in  question  to  Hezekiah.     It  may  be  of  use,  howev- 
er, to  call  his  attention  again  to  the  sut^^ei.    I  there- 
fore beg  of  him  to  observe  those  facts,  and  particu- 
larly the  following   instances.     Ch.   ix.    1,  promises 
that  Israel  shall  not  sutTcr  so  severelv  from  the  sec- 
ond  as  from  the  former  invasion  of  the  king  of  Assy- 
ria, when  he   invaded  Lebanon   and  Naphtali  and 
Galilee  beyond  Jordan.     So  we  find  it  mentioned  in 
2  Kings  XV.  29  :  "  In  the  days  of  Pekah,  king  of  Is- 
rael, Tiglath-Pileser,  king  of  Assyria,  took   Ijon  and 
Abel-Beth-Maachah,  and  Janoah,  and   Kedesh,  and 
Hazor,  and   Gilead,  and  Galilee,  and  all  the  land  of 
Naphtali,   and   carried    Israel   captive  to   Assyria." 
But  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  so  far  from  reducing 
Israel  to  captivity,  the  king  of  Assyria  was  compell- 
ed to  return  to  his  country  with   great  loss,  leaving 
Israel  safe  in  their  places.     (2  Kings  xix.    35,   36.) 
Verses  2  and  3  declare  the  joy  which    Israel  were 
to  feel  at  their  delivery  from   the   hands   of  their 
cruel  invaders,  and  (ver.  4)  at  throwing  off  the  yoke 
and  rod  of  the    oppressor.     We  find  accordingly,  in 
2  Kings  xviii.  7,  that  Hezekiah  rebelled  against  the 


145 

king  of  Assyria,  and  served  him  not.  Verse  5  fore- 
tells the  destruction  of  the  army  of  the  invaders.  So 
we  find,  2  Kings  xix.  34,  35,  that  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  slew  a  great  part  of  the  army  of  the  Assyrian 
invaders.  Verses  6  and  7  speak  of  the  illustrious 
son  who  was  then  to  reign  with  justice  and  judg- 
ment. So  we  find  in  2  Kings  xviii.  3 — 7,  that  Hez- 
ekiah during  his  reign  did  wliat  was  right  in  the 
sight  of  God,  so  that,  after  or  before  him,  there  was 
none  like  him   among   the  kings  of  Judah ;  and  that 

the   Lord  was  with   him   wheresoever  he    went 

Verses  9  and  10  speak  of  the  displeasure  of  ihe 
Lord  at  the  pride  and  stoutness  of  heart  of  Ephraim 
and  the  inhabitants  of  Samaria,  the  enemies  of  Hez- 
ekiah and  his  father.  So  we  find  in  2  Kings  xviii 
10,  11,  that  the  people  of  Samaria  were  defeated 
and  made  prisoners  by  the  Assyrians  in  the  sixth 
year  of  Hezekiah.  Verse  1 3,  pf  the  Lord's  setting, 
up  the  adversaries  of  Hezin,  the  king  of  Syria'' 
agamst  him.  So  we  find  in  Isaiah  vii.  that  Rczin' 
the  kmg  of  Syria,  who,  with  Ephraim,  besieged  Je- 
rusalem at  the  time  the  city  had  borne  the  child 
mentioned   m  ch.  vii.   14,  was  defeated    by  his   ad 

versanes.       Verses   12—20    desrrih^  ih^ 

^^    ocscriDe  the    anorer  of 

Ood,    as  occasioned    by  the  wickedness  of  Israel  — 
Verse  21    of   Epiiraim  and   Manasseh  having  joi„. 
cd  together    to   invade   Judah.     Ch.    x.    1-6    do 
nounce  punishment   to  (l,e  wicked  people  of  Judah 
kv   the    hands  of  the   Assyrians.     So  Ic  find    „   o 

HZk"h '•  tlil'     '^^  :\""^  'r '-'^^""^  •>-^  ^f  '^"'g 
riezekiah,   the  great  km^  of  Assyria  ramn  .     • 

■'.Klah,  and  .ook  a.,  h.r  Lj^Z  TeUT 


I 
I' 


'(j 


II 


146 


147 


14,  of  the  boasting  of  the  king  of  Assyria  as  to  his 
power  and  conquests  of  many  kingdoms,  and  his  de- 
struction of  the  gods  of  diilercnt  nations,  and  of  his 
contempt  for  the  Hving  God  of  the  Jews  in  Jerusa- 
lem. So  we  find  in  2  Kings  xviii.  33 — 35,  and  xix. 
11 — 14,  that  the  king  of  Assyria  boasted  of  his  great 
power,  and  of  having  subdued  the  gods  of  the  na- 
tions, and  that  he  despised  Jehovah,  the  true,  living 
God,  even  blaspheming  him  in  a  message  to  Hezeki- 
ah.  Verses  12 — 26,  promising  to  punish  the  king  of 
Assyria,  and  to  bring  ruin  upon  him,  for  his  high 
boastings,  and  for  his  contempt  against  the  Lord. 
So  we  find  in  2  Kings  xix.  21—34,  that  the  Lord  en- 
couraged the  virgin,  the  daughter  of  Zion,  and  the 
daughter  of  Jerusalem,  to  despise  the  king  of  Assy- 
ria, whom  he  had  determined  to  punish  for  h's  dis- 
respect ;  and  promised  safety  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem  on  the  prayer  offered  by  Hezekiah.  So 
also  we  find  in  2  Kings  xix.  35,  and  2  Chron.  xxxii.  21, 
that  the  Lord  sent  his  angel  into  the  camp  of  the 
king  of  Assyria  and  slew  his  mighty  men,  leaders 
and  captains.  Verse  27  promises  the  king  of  Judah's 
liberation  from  the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Assyria.  So 
we  find,  2  Kings  xviii.  7,  that  Hezekiah  rebelled 
against  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  served  him  not 
afterwards.  It  was  not  Hezekiah  alone  that,  in  the 
beginning  of  his  reign,  acknowledged  dependence 
upon  the  king  of  Assyria,  but  his  father  Ahaz  also 
confessed  the  superiority  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  and 
sued  to  him  for  protection  against  the  kings  of  Syria 
and  of  Israel  when  Hezekiah  was  only  a  child. 
(2  Kings  XV  i.  7,  8.) 


The  public  may  now  judge  whether  or  not  the 
above  circumstances,  and  the  contents  of  chapters 
vii.  and  viii.  noticed  in  the  preceding  paragraphs,  de- 
termine the  application  of  Isaiah  ix.  6,  7,  to  Heze- 
kiah, who  "did  that  which  was  right  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord  ;"  "  removed  high  places;"  "  broke  the  im- 
ages and  cut  down  the  groves ;"  "  trusted  in  the 
Lord  God  of  Israel ;"  "  clave  to  the  Lord,  and  de- 
parted not  from  following  him  ;"  "  with  whom  the 
Lord  was r  who  "prospered  whithersoever  he 
went;"  and  prior  and  subsequent  to  whose  reign, 
"was  none  like  him  among  all  the  kings  of  Judah." 
(2  Kings  xviii.  3 — 7.)  And  they  may  also  decide 
whether  the  delivery  of  Israel  from  the  attack  of 
the  Assyrians,  and  the  punishment  inflicted  upon  the 
king  of  Assyria  in  the  prescribed  manner,  took  place 
in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  or  that  of  Jesus  Christ. 
If  my  readers  compare  minutely  chapters  vii. — x. 
and  xxxix.  of  Isaiah  with  2  Kings  xv.  xvi.  xviii. — xx. 
they  will,  I  trust,  have  a  still  clearer  view  of  the 
subject. 

In  common  with  the  son  mentioned  in  Isaiah  ix.  6, 
who  was  called  Hezekiah,  "  God  my  strength,''^  "  /m- 
manueU^'  "  God  with  us,"  Wonderful,  Counsellor, 
mighty  God,  the  Father  of  the  everlasting  age,  the 
Prince  of  Peace,"  human  beings,  and  even  inanimate 
objects,  were  designated  by  the  same  terms,  or  sim- 
ilar epithets,  as  noticed  in  pages  283 — 285,  315, 
316,  of  my  Second  Appeal,  without  being  held  up 
as  the  most  high  Jehovah. 

Moreover,  the  difference  between  "  to  be"  and 
"  to  be  called"  is   worth    observing,  as  I  noticed  in 


S 


'         »1 


%\ 


'    1 


V^ 


148 


149 


/ 


the  hote  at  pp.  315,  316,  of  the  Second  Appeal,  tu 
which  I  beg  to  refer  my  readers.  As  to  the  phrases 
"  no  end,"  and  "  forever,"  or  "  everlasting,"  found  in 
Isaiah  ix.  6,  7,  these  when  applied  to  creatures  are 
always  to  be  taken  in  a  limited  sense,  the  former 
signifying  plenteousness,  the  latter  long  duration,  as 
I  observed  in  note,  page  277  of  ihe  Second  Appeal 
Vide  Gen.  xlix.  26  ;  Heb.  iii.  6. 

St.  Matthew,  in  an  accommodated  sense,  applies  Isa- 
iah ix.  1,  2,  to  Jesus,  whose  spiritual  reign  delivered 
also  the  inhabitants  of  Zebulun,  and  the  land  of 
Naphtalim  and  Galilee,  from  the  darkness  of  sin,  in 
the  same  way  as  in  Hezekiah's  reign  their  inhabi- 
tants were  saved  from  the  darkness  of  foreign  in- 
vasion. 

As  the  Editor  and  many  orthodox  Christians  lay 
much  stress  on  the  application  of  the  term  Immanuel 
to  Jesus,  I  offer  the  following  observations.  The 
sura  total  of  their  argument  is  derived  from  the  fol- 
lowing verse.  Matt.  i.  23:  "  And  they  shall  call  his 
name  Immanuel,  which,  being  interpreted,  is  God 
with  us."  This  name  is  composed  of  three  Hebrew 
words,  «  Emma"  D^  with ;  "  noo,"  t:!  us;  «  el,"  ^N 
God  ;  that  is,  with  us  God  ;  hence  the  advocates  for 
the  Trinity  conclude  that  Jesus  is  here  called  God, 
and  that  he  must  therefore  be  God.  But  let  us  as- 
certain whether  other  beings  are  not,  in  common 
with  Jesus,  called  by  designations  compounded  with 
«/,  or  God,  in  the  sacred  writings,  or  whether  the 
term  el  is  exclusively  applied  to  Jehovah  and  Jesus, 
and  then  direct  our  attention  to  the  above-stated 
conclusion.     Gen.   xxxii.    24:  "And  Jacob  was  left 


alone,  and  there  wrestled  a  man  with  him   until  the 
breaking  of  the  day."     Ver.  30  :    "  And   he  (Jacob) 
called   the  name  of  the   place  ^N^^D,  Penic/ ;  for  I 
have  seen  God  face  to   face,  and  my  life  is  preserv- 
ed."    Here  the  place  is  called  the  face  of  c/,  (God,) 
and  the  angel  who  wrestled  with  and  blessed  Jacob, 
and  whom  he  saw  there,   is  styled   el  (God.)     Ver. 
28  :  "  And  he  (the    angel)   said.  Thy  name  shall  be 
called  no  more  Jacob,  but    Israc/ ;  for   as  a  prince 
hast   thou  power  with  God  and  with  men,  and  hast 
prevailed^     As   Jacob  in   wrestling   with  the  angel, 
shewed  him  his  power  and  prevailed,  he  was  called 
Israel^  the  prince  of  God,  or,  properly  speaking,  the 
prince  of  the  angel ;  for  it   would  be  the   grossest 
blasphemy  to  say  that   Jacob  wrestled  with  the  Al- 
mighty God,  and  prevailed  over  him.    So  we  find  in 
Gen.  xlvi.  17,  "  Malchic/,"  that  is,   "  my  king  God ;" 
Dan.  viii.  16,  "  Gabric/,"   "mighty   God;"  1   Chron. 
XV.   18,   "  Jaazic/,"  "strong   God;"  ver.    20,  Jehic/, 
"  living  God ;"  1  Sam.  viii.  2,  "  The  name  of  his  first- 
born was  Joe/,"  that  is,  "  Jehovah  God." 

Moreover,  the  very  term  Immanuel  is  applied  im- 
mediately in  Isaiah  vii.  14,  to  the  deliverer  of  Judah 
from  the  invasion  of  the  king  of  Syria,  and  that  of 
Israel,  during  the  reign  of  Ahaz  ;  but  none  esteem- 
ed him  to  be  God,  from  the  application  of  this  term 
to  him.  Besides,  by  referring  to  Parkhurst's  He- 
brew Lexicon,  on  the  explanation  of  the  word  c/,  (or 
God,)  we  find  "  that  Christian  emperors  of  the 
fourth  and  fifth  centuries  would  suffer  themselves  to 
be  addressed  by  the  style  of  "  your  divinity ^'^^  "  your 
Godship.^^     And  also  by  referring  to  the  Old  Testa- 


>tj 


.,  t 


i\ 


^.    f- ' 


4&  '  I 


/ 


J  50 

jiient  we  iind  the  terms*  bii  el,  CU^1^^C  eloliim,  or 
God,  often  applied  to  superiors.  No  one,  therefore, 
can  be  justified  in  charging  the  apostle  Matthew  with 
•jnconsistencj,  on  account  of  his  having  used,  even  in 
an  accommodated  sense,  the  phrase  "  Immanuel,"  for 
Jesus,  appointed  by  God  as  the  Lord  of  the  Jews 
and  Gentiles. 

The  Editor  denies  the  truth  of  my  assertion  in 
the  Second  Appeal,  (page  283,)  that  David  is  also 
called  the  holy  one  of  Israel,  in  Psalm  Ixxxix.  and 
insists  that  Jehovah  and  the  future  Messiah  only  are 
styled  the  holy  one.  I  therefore  beg  to  refer  my 
readers  to  the  whole  context  of  the  Psalm  in  ques- 
tion, a  few  passages  of  which  I  here  subjoin.  Ver. 
19,  20  :  "  Then  thou  spakest  in  vision  to  t/iy  holtj 
one,  and  saidst,  I  have  found  David,  my  servant; 
with  my  ho/y  oil  have  1  anointed  him."  Vers.  26,  27: 
"  He  shall  cry  unto  me,  thou  art  my  Father,  JUY 
GOD,  and  the  Rock  of  MY  SALVATIOJV.  Also 
I  will  make  him  my  first-born."  Ver.  35  :  "  Once 
have  I  sworn  by  my  holiness,  that  I  will  not  lie  unto 
DAVlDr  Vers.  38,  39  :  «  But  thou  hast  cast  off 
and  abhorred,  thou  hast  been  wroth  with  thine  anoint- 
ed. Thou  hast  made  void  the  covenant  of  thy  ser- 
vant." Ver.  44:  "Thou  hast  made  his  glory  to 
cease."  Ver.  45:  "  Thou  hast  covered  him  with 
shame."  The  public  now  may  judge  whether  the 
above  sentences  are  applicable  to  king  David,  or  to 
Jesus,  whose  glory  never  ceased,  with  whom  God  has 

*  Ezekiel  xxxi.  11  :  ZD>>1  *?N  "  The  mighty  one  of  the  heathen."  Exod. 
^▼•15:  3Nio^Sn  "The  mighty  men  of  Moab."  1  Sam.  xxviii.  13:  ^r^m 
C3>n'^N  "  I  saw  God,"  that  is,^Samuel  Exodus  xxii.  8  :  d^hSk.i  Vn  «  To  the 
<»ods ;"  that  is,  the  judges. 


151 

never  been  wroth,  and  who  cannot  be  supposed  to 
have  been  covered  with  shame.  Besides,  it  is  evi- 
dent from  this  passage,  that  the  term  "  holy  one"  is 
applied  to  one  constantly  styled  a  servant. 

The  Editor  inquires,  (page  570,)  what  instances  1 
bring  that  these  names,  peculiar  to  God,  such  as 
wonderful,  counsellor,  the  mighty  God,  the  everlast- 
ing- Father,  the  Prince  of  Peace,  were  applied  to 
certain  kings  in  Israel ;  I  therefore  beg  to  refer  him 
to  the  passages  mentioned  in  pages  315  and  316  of 
the  Second  Appeal,  in  which  he  will  find  the  same 
epithets  given  to  human  beings,  and  even  to  inani- 
mate objects. 

With  a  view  to  deduce  the  deity  of  Jesus  Christ 
from  the  comparison  of  Isaiah  xxviii.  16,  with  Isaiah 
viii.  13,  and  with  1  Peter  ii.  8,  the  Rev.  Editor  thus 
comments  (page  570)  :  "  The  declaration  is,  that  Je- 
hovah of  hosts  shall  be  for  a  stumbling-stone,  and 
for  a  rock  of  offence  to  the  two  houses  of  Israel:  but 
after  the  delivery  of  this  prophecy,  was  he  this  to 
them  prior  to  the  coming  of  Christ  ?  As  the  house 
of  Israel  was  carried  away  captive  a  few  years  after 
the  delivery  of  this  prophecy,  if  not  a  year  or  two 
before,  it  is  doubtful  whether  they  ever  saw  this  pro- 
phecy while  in  their  own  land ;  but  Christ  has  been 
a  stone  of  stumbling  and  rock  of  offence  to  all  of 
every  tribe  for  nearly  eighteen  centuries,  while  he 
has  been  a  sanctuary  to  all  who  have  trusted  in  him." 
I  need  not  prolong  the  discussion  by  pointing  out, 
that  Isaiah  delivered  this  prophecy  in  the  reign  of 
Ahaz,  that  the  captivity  of  one  of  the  houses  of  Isra- 
el  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  his  son.  and 


*    H 


i 


u 


V' 


/• 


/ 


1.02 

that  of  the  other  house,   in  the   reign  of  Zedekiah, 
the  ninth  king  of  Judah,  from  the  time  of  Ahaz.     As 
the  Editor   acknowledges  the  fact  of  the   house  of 
Israel  being  "carried  away  captive  a  few  years  after 
the  dehvery  of  this  prophecy,"  he  will  undoubtedly 
be  persuaded  to  confess,  also,   the   circumstance  of 
their  distress  and  misery  just  before,  as  well  as  dur- 
ing the  time  of  captivity,  by  an  attentive  reference  to 
the  sacred  histories,    2  Kings  and   2   Chron.     The 
necessary   consequence,   then,   will  be,   that  he   will 
clearly  perceive  that  the  above-stated  prophecy  of 
Isaiah  had   been  duly   fulfilled    long  before  Christ's 
birth,  the  Lord  of  hosts  having  become  for  a  stum- 
bling-stone   and  for  a  rock   of  offence   to    the    two 
houses  of  Israel,  soon  after  the   prophet's  declara- 
tion ;  and  that   1   Peter  ii.  7,  8,  ("  The  stone  which 
the  builders  disallowed,  the  same   is  made  the  head 
of  the  corner.     And  a  stone  of  stumbling,  and  rock 
of  offence,  even  to  them  who  stumble  at  the  word, 
Being  disobedient,")  is  but  a  general  statement  of  the 
ill  consequences  attached  to  disobedience,   whether 
on   the    part  of  Israel,  or  of    the  Gentiles,  to  the 
word  delivered  to  them  by  Jesus  in  his  divine  com- 
mission.    Jesus  is  here  represented  as  a  stone,  re- 
jected by  men  but  chosen  by  God ;  and,  consequently, 
he  must  be  a   stumbling-stone  to   those  who   reject 
him,  stumbling  at  his  word.    Common  sense,  if  not 
biassed  by  early   prejudice,  is   sufficient    to   decide, 
that  a  stone,  which  is  chosen  and  made  the  head  of 
the  corner  by  a  maker,  must  not  be  esteemed  as  the 
maker  himself. 

The  Editor  comments,  however,  on   the  phrase, 


IM 


'*  made  the  head  of  the  corner,"  in  verse  7,  saying, 
"  As  to  his  being  made  the  head  of  the  corner  by 
his  heavenly  Father,  this  can  no  more  affect  his  un- 
changeable deity,  than  his  being  made  flesh."  This 
is  as  much  as  to  say,  that  the  circumstance  of  his 
being  made  the  head  of  the  corner  is  as  much  a  proof 
of  his  changeable  nature  as  the  fact  of  his  being 
made  flesh  ;  for  were  we  to  admit,  that  the  circum- 
stance of  an  object  being  made  flesh,  or  matter,  which 
he  was  not  before,  does  not  evince  the  changeable- 
iiess  of  the  nature  of  that  object,  we  must  then  be 
at  a  loss  to  discover  even  a  single  changeable  object 
in  the  world.  If  one's  being  made  flesh,  and  his 
growth  and  reduction,  in  the  progress  of  time,  should 
not  be  considered  as  an  evidence  of  a  change  in  him, 
every  man  might  claim  the  honor  of  an  immutable 
nature,  and  set  up  as  God  made  flesh. 

The  Editor  says,  (page  571,)  that  I  "  attempted  to 
evade  Isaiah  xl.  3,  ('  The  voice  of  him  that  crieth 
in  the  wilderness.  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord, 
make  straight  in  the  desert  a  highway  for  our  God,') 
by  coupling  it  with  Malachi  iii.  1,  Q  Behold,  I  will 
send  my  messenger,  and  he  shall  prepare  the  way 
before  me  ;  and  the  Lord,  whom  ye  seek,  shall  sud- 
denly come  into  his  temple,  even  the  messenger  of 
the  covenant,  whom  ye  delight  in ;  behold,  he  shall 
come,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,-)  and  confining  his  an- 
imadversions to  the  latter."  I  trust  the  Editor,  by 
referring  to  Mark  i.  2,  3,  will  find,  that  in  coupling 
the  above  verses,  I  did  no  more  than  follow  the  ex- 
ample of  that  evangelist,  who  also  coupled  them  in 
his  Gospel.     As  the  explanation,  adopted  by  me.  qf 

20 


v^V 


ll 


154 


the  prophecy  of  Malachi,  fully  explains  the  passage 
of  Isaiah,  1  confined  my  animadversion  to  the  for- 
mer; for,  "we  find,  in  the  book  of  that  prophet, 
distinct  and  separate  mention  of  Jehovah,  and  of  the 
Messiah,  as  the  messenger  of  the  covenant :  John, 
therefore,  ought  to  be  considered  as  the  forerunner 
of  both,  and  as  the  preparer  of  the  way  of  both  ;  in 
the  same  manner  as  a  commander,  sent  in  advance  to 
occupy  a  strong  post  in  the  country  of  the  enemy, 
may  be  said  to  be  preparing  the  way  for  the  battles 
of  his  king,  or  of  the  general,  whom  the  king  places 
at  the  head  of  his  army."  (Second  Appeal,  pp.  285, 
286.)  On  which  explanation  the  Editor  observes, 
that  "The  fact  is,  that  Malachi  does  not  mention 
two ;  it  is  Jehovah  who  was  suddenly  to  come  into 
his  temple  ;  and  afterwards,  Jehovah  and  the  mes- 
senger of  the  covenant  are  identified  by  the  proph- 
ets," adding,  "  he  shall  come,"  not  "  they."  But  we 
find,  in  the  original  Hebrew,  Mai.  iii.  1,  "a/idthe 
messenger  of  the  covenant,"  with  the  conjunction 
"  and,"  after  the  mention  of  the  Lord.  It  is,  there- 
fore, evident,  that  the  messenger  of  the  covenant  is 
distinctly  and  separately  mentioned.  How  the  Edi- 
tor supposes  that  "  Malachi  does  not  mention  two," 
I  am  unable  to  guess.  We  find  also,  immediately 
after  the  mention  of  '•  the  messeng^er  of  the  cove- 
nant,  whom  ye  delight  in,"  the  prophet  adds,  "  Be- 
hold, he  shall  come,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,"  as  the 
saying  of  Jehovah. — How  can  the  mention  of  the 
messenger  of  the  covenant,  in  the  third  person,  by 
the  Deity,  prove  the  unity  of  that  messenger  with 
the  Deitv  ?    Were   we  to  admit,   that  everv    beinii' 


J. 55 


spoken  of  in  the   third  person   by  God,  is  identified 
with  God,  the  number   of  identified  gods  must,   in 
that    case,  amount  at  least  to   thousands  in  the  sa- 
cred writings.     It  is   worth  observing,  that  in   the 
original  Hebrew,  "the  messenger  of  the  covenant" 
stands  as  nominative  to  the  verb  JO  or  "  shall  come," 
with  the  pronoun  "  he/'     The  verse  thus  stands  in 
the  original  :  "  Behold,  I  will  send   my   messengej-, 
and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before  me  ;  and  the 
Lord,  whom  ye   seek,  shall   suddenly   come  to  his 
temple  ;  and  the  messenger  of  the  covenant,  whom 
ye  delight  in;  behold,  he  shall  come, (or,  IS  COM- 
liNG,)  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."     The  Editor  adds, 
"  That  Jesus  is   Jehovah,  mentioned   in  Isaiah  xl.  3, 
whose  way  John  was  sent  to  prepare,  is  confirmed  by 
the  testimony  of  Zechariah,  and  John  his  son."     As 
to  the  nature  of  Jesus,  Zechariah  gives  us  to  under- 
stand, (Luke  i.  69,)  that  God   "  hath  raised  up  an 
horn  of  salvation  for  us  in  the  house  of  his  servant 
,    David."     In  the   evangelical    writings  of  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke,  we  find  Jesus  represented  by  John, 
as  mightier  than  himself.     In  John  we  find  still  more 
explicit  testimony,  (i.  29,)  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God, 
who  takethaway  the  sin  of  the  world."  (30.)  "  This 
is  he  of  whom  I    said,  After  me  cometh  a  man  who 
is   preferred  before   me."      My   readers   may   now 
judge  whether  Zechariah  and  John  confirmed    the 
identity  of  Jesus  with  Jehovah,  or  represented  him 
as  a  creature  raised  and  exalted  by  hisand  our  Fath- 
er, the  Most  High. 

Some  orthodox  divines  having  attempted  to  prove 
the  deity  of  Jesus,  bv  comparing  Isaiah  xl.  10,  ("Be- 


1' 


f  M 


hold,  the  Lord  God  will  come  wuh  a  strou.  hand: 
and  h^  arm  shall  rule  for  him:  behold,  his  reward 
"s  with  h.m,  and  his   work  before  him,")  with  Rev 
xxn.  12,  ("  Behold,  1  come  quickly,  and  my  reward 
.s  «''th  me    to  give  to  every  man  according  as    his 
work  shall  be,")   I    brought  to  their  notice,  (in  mv 
becond  Appeal,   page  296,)  John  v.   30,  22,  «  The 
father  judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  commilted  all  judg- 
ment „„,    ,he  Sonr  and  Matt.  xvi.  27,  «  For  the  So'n 
of  Man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his 
angels,  and  then  he  shall  reward  every  man  accord- 
uig  to  Ins  works."     To  weaken  the  force  of  my  ar- 
gun^ent,  the  Editor  says,  (p.  r,73,)  «  These  passag- 
es however,  do  not   in  the  least  affbct  the  question, 
which  .s  not,  by  what  a.ithority  Christ  rewards,  but 
whether  he  be  the  person  described  as  rewarding; 
and  this,  these   very  passages  confirm,   particularly 
Rev.  XXU-.  12."     If  in  the  adminstering  of  judgment 
and  of  reward,  as  well  as  in  the  performance  of  mir- 
acles  the  authority  by  which  these   things  are  done 
should  be  considered  as  a  matter  of  no  consequence, 
the  almighty  power  of  Josus,   and  that  of  several 
others,  might  be  established  on  an  equal  footing.     Is 
it   not,    therefore,    a    subject    worthy    of  question, 
whether  Joshua  ordered  the  sun  and  the  moon  to 
stop  their    motions,  by  the  authority  of  God,  or  bv 
his  own  power  ?     Is  it  not  a  question  worth   deter- 
mining, whether  Elijah  raised   the  dead   by  the  au- 
thority of  the  Most  High,  or  independently  of  the 
Almighty  power?     But  if  we   consider  it  incumbent 
on  us   to  beheve  and   to    know    that  those  prophets 
performed  works  peculiarly  ascribed  to  God.  bv  tlie 


J 


) 


1.07 

authority   of  his  Divine   Majesty  ;  why   should    we 
not  deem  it  also  necessary  to  ascertain  whether  the 
authority  to  judge  men,  and  reward  them  according- 
ly, as  well  as  the  power  of  performing  miracles,  were 
vested  in  Jesus,  by  the  omnipotent  God,  or  exercis- 
ed by  him  independently  of   the  Father  of  the  uni- 
verse ?     In  point  of  fact,  we  find  the  following  posi- 
tive avowal  of  Jesus  himself—"  The  Father  judgeth 
no  man,  but  hath  committed  all   judgment  unto  the 
Son."—"  As  I  hear  I  judge ;  and  my  judgment   is 
just :  because  I  seek  not  mine  own  will,  but  the  will 
of  the  Father  who   hath  sent  me."     Here  the  Edi- 
tor offers  the  following  explanation,  saying,  that  "  All 
power,  as  to  providence  and  final  judgment,  is  com- 
mitted  to  him,  not  merely  as  the  Son,  but  as  the  Son 
of  Man,  the  Mediator,  because  he  made  himself  the 
Son  of  Man."     This  amounts  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
two-fold  nature  of  Jesus,  the  absurdity  of  which  I 
Jiave  often  noticed.     I  may,  however,  be  permitted 
to  ask  the  Editor,  whether  there  is  any  authority  for 
the  assertion  that  Jesus,  as  the  Son  of  Man,  was  de- 
|>endent  on  God  for  the    exercise  of  his  power;  but 
as  the  Son  of  God  was  quite  an  independent  Deity  ? 
So  far  from  meeting  with  such    authority,  we  find 
that  Jesus,  in  every  epithet  that  he  was  designated  by. 
IS  described  to  be  subject  to  and  dependent  on  God! 
Acts  xvii.  31  :  «  Because  he  hath  appointed  a  day  in 
which  HE  will  judge    the  world  in  righteousness,  by 
that   MAJV  whom  he  hath  ordained ;  whereof  he 
hath  given  assurance  unto  all  men,  in  that  he  hath 
raised  him  from  the  dead."     John  viii.  28  :    «  Then 
*aid  .lesus  unto  them.   When  ye   have  lifted  up  the 


.-•I* 


^1 


,  i 


\ 


^ 


^ 


=4 


158 

SON  of  MAIN,  then  shall  ye  know  that   1   am   he, 
and  that  /  do  nothing  of  myself;  but  as  my  Father 
\mi\\  taught   me,  I  speak  these   things."     xvii.   1,2: 
'*  Father,  the  hour  is  come:  glorify   thy  Son,  that 
THY   SON  also    may  glorify  thee.     As    thou  hast 
given  HIMi^ower  over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give 
eternal  life   to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him,''     He- 
brews  i.  8,  9  :  "  Thy   throne,  O   GOD,  is  forever 
and  ever ;    a  sceptre  of  righteousness  is  the  sceptre 
of  thy  kingdom:  Thou  hast  loved  righteousness  and 
hated  iniquity;  therefore  God,   even   THY  GOD, 
hath  anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy 
fellows:'     The  Editor  says,  «  His  glory  he  (the  Son) 
may,  for  a  season,  lay  aside,  but  his  divine  nature  he 
can  never  change."     I  wish  to  be  informed  what  kind 
of  divine  nature  it  was  that  could  be  divested  of  its 
glory*  and  power,t  even  for  a   season.     To  my  un- 
derstanding, such  divinity  must  be  analogous  to  mat- 
ter without  space   or  gravity,  or  sunbeam   without 
light,  which  my  limited  capacity,  I  must  confess,  can- 
not comprehend. 

The  Editor  finally  argues,  that  "  as  the  Father's 
commiting  to  the  Son  the  entire  work  and  glory  of 
being  the  final  judge  of  all,  judging  no  man  himself, 
does  not  change  his  glorious  nature,  so  the  Son's  lay- 
ing aside  liis  glory  and  becoming  man,  in  no  way 
changes  his  original  nature  and  godhead."  It  is  true 
that  God's  committing  to  the  Son  the  authority  of 
judgment,  bestowing  on  the  sun  the  power  of  cast- 
ing light  upon  the  planets  round  him,  and  enabling 
superiors   to   provide  food  and  protection  for  their 

*  John  xvii.  5,  22.  +  John  xvii.  2 ;  Acts  x.  3«. 


159 

dependents,  do  not  imply  any  change  in  his  glorious 
nature  ;  for  it  is  ordained  by  the  laws  of  nature,  that 
nothing  can  be  effected,  in  this  visible  world,  without 
the  intervention  of  some  physical  means ;  but  that 
the  Son's,  or  any  other  being's,  laying  aside  his  glory 
and  becoming  a  man,  must  produce  at  least  a  tempo- 
rary change  in  his  nature,  is  a  proposition  as  obvious 
as  any  that  can  be  submitted  to  the  understanding. 

I  have,  of  course,  omitted  to  quote  John  v.  23, 
during  this  discussion  in  my  Second  Appeal,  because 
it  has  no  relation  to  the  subject,  and  because  I  no- 
ticed it  fully  in  another  part  of  that  publication, 
page  189. 

I  will  also  refrain  from  noticing,  in  this  place, 
Heb.  i.  12,  alluded  to  by  the  Editor,  as  I  have  already 
considered  that  passage  as  fully  as  possible  in  the 
preceding  chapter,  pp.  101,  102. 

The  Editor  next  comes  to  Isaiah  xliv.  6  :  "  Thus 
saith  the  Lord,  the  King  of  Israel,  and  his  redeemer 
Jehovah  of  hosts,  I  am  the  first  and  I  am  the  last, 
and  beside  me  there  is  no  God ;"  comparing  it  with 
Rev.  i.  8,  and  xxii.  13.  This  argument  has  been  al- 
ready replied  to  in  my  Second  Appeal;  it  shall  be 
again  adverted  to  shortly.  He  then  endeavors  to 
prove  that  Jesus  cannot  be  meant  as  prohibitino-  John 
from  worshipping  him  in  verse  9,  saying,  that  "  In 
this  book  hvc  persons  address  at  different  times  ; 
two  of  the  elders  around  the  throne,  two  angels,  and 

he  who  is  the  grand  speaker  throughout  the  book 

whom  he,  after  the  first  chapter,  often  introduces 
without  the  least  notice,  while  he  previously  describes 
overy  other  speaker  with  the  utmost  care."      The 


.-'V 


\ 


I(J0 

Editor,  hoH-ever,  has  quoted  only  instances  in  which 
John  describes  the  two  elders  and  the  two  an<rels  in 
a  distinct  manner;  but  I  cannot  find  that  he  Adduc- 
es even  a  single  instance  where  the  «  grand  speaker" 
IS  « introduced  without  the  least  notice."     Again  he 
says,  "How  could  Jesus  forbid  John  to  worship  him 
after  he  received  worship  by  the  command  of  God 
from  all  the  angels  f  I  may  be,  on  the  same  princi- 
ple, jusl.dcd  in  asking  the  Editor,  How  the  anael 
could  forbid  John  to  worship  him,  while   he  knew 
that  other  angels  of  God,  and  even  human  beings 
liad  received  worship  from  fellow-creatures "?  Josh- 
ua v   14:  "And  Joshua  fell  on  his  face  to  the  earth 
and  did  worship   and  said  unto  him,"  (the   captain" 
of   he  host  of  the  Lord,)  "  What  saith  my  Lord  un- 
to his  servant?"  Numb.  xxii.  .31  :  «  And  he  (Balaam) 
saw  the  angel  of  the  Lord  standing  in  the  way,  and 
his  sword  drawn  in  his  hand,  and  he  bowed  down  his 
head,  and  fell  flat  on  his  face."  Daniel  ii.  46  :  «  Then 
the    king    Nebuchadnezzar   fell    upon  his  face  and 
worshipped    Daniel."     As   the    Editor's    argument, 
therefore,  must  apply  with   equal  force  to  angels  as 
to  Jesus,  It  IS  quite  plain  that  no  conclusion  can  be 
drawn  from  it  relative  to  the  identity  of  the    beiix. 

who,  III  Rev.   xxii.   9,  forbids  lohn  tn  ...^^.k-     u-  " 

'  '"'"'".»  Jonn  to  worship  him. 

riie  fact  IS,  that  the  word  «  worship,"  in  scriptural 
language,  is  used  sometimes  as  implying  an  external 
mark  ot  religious  reverence  paid  to  God  ;  and  since, 
m  this  sense,  worship  was  ottbrcd  by  John  to  the  an- 
gel, or  to  Jesus,  he  refused  it,  as  is  evident  from  the 
last  sentence  of  verse  9,  "  worship  God  ;"— and  some- 
lime,  the  same  word  «  worship"  is  used  as  signifvin- 


161 

merely  a  token  of  civil  respect  due  to  superiors  :  and 
accordingly,  in  this  latter  sense,  not  only  Jesus,  but 
angels  and  prophets,  and  even  temporal  princes  or 
masters,  used  to  accept  of  it,  as  we  find  in  Matt,  xviil. 
26,  "The   servant,   therefore,  fell   down  and   wor- 
shipped him,"  and  so  in  various  other  instances.     It 
denotes,  in  this  acceptation,  merely  a  mark  of  reve- 
rence, which  neither  identifies  those    to  whom  it  is 
offered  with   the  Deity,  nor  raises  them  to  a  level 
with   their  Creator,  the   Most  High.     Mj  readers 
will  observe,  that  the  author  of  the  book  of  Rev. 
elation  declares  himself,  in  ch.  i.  17,  to  have  fallen 
at  the  feet  of  Jesus  ;  and  he  speaks  also,  in  ch.  v. 
8,  of    the   four    beasts  and   four-and-twenty    elders 
having   fallen    down    before    the   Lamb;    avoiding, 
however,  in  these  places,  as  well  as  throughout  the 
whole    book  of  Revelation,   the   use  of   the    word 
worship    to   express    the    reverence   shewn   to   the 
Lamb  ;  while  to  the  words  "  fell  down,"  when  refer- 
ring to  God,  he  adds   invariably,   "  and  worshipped 
him."     Vide  ch.  vii.    11,  xi.   16,  xix.    4,  and  v.    14: 
3dly.  He  says,  «  How  could  Jesus,  who  declares  him- 
self to  be  Alpha  and  Omega,  the  beginning  and  the 
end,  reject  worship  from  John  f     I  do  not  wonder 
at  the  Editor's  entirely  neglecting  to  notice  my  re- 
marks on  the  terms  «  Alpha  and  Omega,"  or,  "  the 
beginning  and  the  end,"  in  the  Second  Appeal,  page 
295, — to   wit,  "Alpha   and  Omega,    beginning    and 
end,   are,    in    a    finite    sense,   justly    applicable    to 
Jesus,"— when  I  find  him  regardless  of  the  explana- 
tion given  by  John  himself  respecting  these  terms, 
and  by  St.  Paul,  one  of  his  fellow-laborers.      Rev.  iii. 

21 


1G2 

14:  -These  things  saith  the  Amen,  the  faithful  and 
true  witness,  the  beginning  of  the  creation  of  God  : 
I  know  thy  works,"  &c.  Col.  i.  15:  "The  first- 
born of  every  creature."  i.  Cor.  xv.  24  :  "  Then 
Cometh  the  end,  when  he  shall  have  delivered  up 
the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father^  Ver.  28  :  "And 
when  all  things  shall  be  subdued  unto  him,  then  shall 
the  Son  a/so  himself  be  subject  unto  him,  that  God 
may  be  all  in  all." 

As  to  Rev.  i.  8,  introduced  again  by  the  Editor, 
the  expressions  it  contains  arc  given  as  those  of  God 
himself,  and   not    of  Christ,  since  it   describes    the 
speaker  to  be  Him  "  who  is,  and  who  was,  and  who 
IS   to  come,    the   Almighty" — an  epithet    peculiarly 
applied  to  God  five   times  in  the  book  of  Revela- 
tion, and  very  often  throughout  the  rest  of  the  sa- 
cred writings,  and  which  is  but  a  repetition  of  what 
is  found  in  the  preceding  verse  (4)  of  that  chapter. 
Being  equivalent  to  "Jehovah,"  it  has  never  been 
applied   to  Jesus   in   any   part   of    the    Revelation, 
either  separately  or  joined  with  the  terms  "  Alpha 
and  Omega."     But,  as  I  have  already  fully  noticed 
this  verse  in  page  123,  1  will  not  return  to  the  sul> 
ject  here.     4thly.      The  Editor  urges,  "How  could 
Jesus,  who  searches  the  heart,  reject  the  acceptance 
of  worship  ?"     In  answer  to  which,  1  beg  to  remind 
him,  that  the  prophets  and  the  apostles  also,  as  far 
as  they  possessed  the  gift  of  prophecy,  were  able  to 
discover  what  passed  in  the  hearts  of  other  men,  or, 
in  other  words,  were  "searchers  of  hearts."     Thus, 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  ch.  v.  3,  4, 8,  9,  St.  Peter 
IS  represented  as  a  searcher  of  the  heart;   but  he'\y 


I 


l(i3 

again  stated,  in  ch.  x.  25,  26,  to  have  prohibited 
Cornelius  from  offering  him  worship.  And  in  2 
Kings  vi.  32,  Elisha  is  declared  to  have  known  what 
passed  in  the  heart  of  the  king,  without  our  there- 
fore acknowledging  him  as  an  object  of  religious 
worship. 

The  Editor,  lastly,  lays  stress  on  the  phrase  found 
in  Rev.  vii.  17,  "The  Lamb  who  is  in  the  midst  of 
the  throne,"  overlooking  the  application  of  the  same 
Avord  "midst"  to  the  elders   and  the  four  beasts,  in 
ch.  iv.  6.  Besides,  such  a  phrase  as  "  to  sit  with  the 
Father  on  his  throne,"  implies  nothing  in  the  book 
of  Revelation  except  an  acquisition  of  holy  perfec- 
tion and  honor,  which  Jesus,  in  common  with  everv 
righteous  Christian,   acquired  through  his  merits, — 
Ch.    iii.    21  :  "  To  him  that  ocercomefh  will  I  ffrant 
to  sit   with   me   m  my   throne,   even  as  I  also  over- 
came, and    am    set    down   with   my    Father    in    his 
throne." 

In  answer  to  his  assertion,  that  it  is  "  the  Lamb 
whom  the  blessed  constantly  adore,  crying.  Holy, 
holy,  holy.  Lord  God  Almighty,"  I  beg  to  refer  my 
readers  to  ch.  iv.  8,  which  contains  this  phrase ;  nay, 
rather  to  the  whole  of  the  chapter,  w^here  they  will 
find  that  no  mention  of  "  the  Lamb,"  or  Jesus,  is 
once  made. 

The  Editor  observes,  (page  577,)  that  "invers- 
es 5,  6,  of  ch.  xxi.  another  speaker  besides  the 
angel  is  introduced  in  an  abrupt  manner."  1  there- 
fore repeat  verse  11,  of  ch.  xx.  and  verse  5 — 7  of 
ch,  xxi.  and  leave  my  readers  to  judge  whether  or 
not  the  speaker  is  here  introduced  in  the  same  ab- 


/. 


-r 


164 

nipt'  manner  as  he  is  alleged  to  be  in  cli.  xxii.  12 
according  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Editor.  Ch.' 
XX.  11:  «  And  I  saw  a  great  white  throne,  and  him 
that  sat  on  it,  from  whose  face  the  earth  and  the 
heaven  fled  away,  and  there  was  found  no  place  for 
them."  Ch.  xxi.  5 :  « And  he  that  sat  upon  the 
throne  said,  Behold,  I  make  all  things  new.  And  he 
said  unto  me,  Write,  for  these  words  are  true  and 
faithful."  Ver.  6  :  "And  he  said  unto  me.  It  is  done 
I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,"  &c.  Ver.  7 :  «  He  that 
oyercometh  shall  inherit  all  things,  and  I  will  be  his 
Lrod,  and  he  shall  be  my  son." 

I  really  cannot  perceive  what  the   Editor  could 
have   meant   by  the  following  remark :  «  He  there 
(in  ver.  5)  uses  the  same  language  found  in  ch.  xxii. 
b,     Write,  for  these   words  are  true  and  faithful'"' 
1  hope  he  could   not   have  intended  to  identify  the 
speaker  in  ch.  xxii.  6,  who  represents  himself  as  a 
fellow-servant  of  John,  with  the  speaker  in  ch.  xxi. 
o,  who  thus,  speaking  of  himself,  says,  (ver.  7,)  "  1 
will  be  his  God,  and  he  shall  be  my  son."     Besides, 
the  language  found   in  ch.  xxi.   5,   is  not   «  the  very 
same    used  in  ch.   xxii.  6,  since  in   the  former  the 
whole  speech  stands  thus_«  Write, for  these  savings 
are  true  and  faithful ;"  but   in  the  latter  we'  fed 
only,     These  sayings  are  faithful  and  true  ;"  but  not 
the  verb  "«,„V  nor  the  causal  preposition  -forr 
Ihe  Editor  comes  next  to  what  he  calls  internal 
evidence  ;    saying,  «  Internal  evidence,  however,  de- 
context.     In  ch.  xvi.  U,  XsXtZl  of  .h^^  I     T""  °^  ^^  "P"''"  '»  1>e 
-rt  a,  a  speaker.    Vide  l" Thels  v.^"  „d  2  1  WiliT"    "'"'^  '"'"''"" 


165 

Dionstrates  that  this  angel  neither  said,  '  Behold,  1 
come  quickly,'  (ver.  7,)  nor  '  I  am  Alpha  and  Ome- 
ga,' (ver.  13)."  Let  us  now  examine  the  context 
and  the  style  of  the  writings  of  the  book  of  Revela- 
tion. 1st.  There  is  not  a  single  instance  in  the 
whole  book  of  Revelation,  in  which  a  speech  is  re- 
lated without  the  previous  introduction  of  the 
speaker;  and  in  this  instance  we  find  an  angel  is 
previously  introduced  in  ver.  6,  as  the  speaker  of 
ver.  7.  The  passage  in  question  (vers.  6—13)  runs 
thus  :  «  And  he  said  unto  me.  These  sayings  are 
faithful  and  true :  and  the  Lord  God  of  the  holy 
prophet  sent  his  angel  to  shew  his  servant  the 
things  which  must  shortly  be  done.  Behold,  I  come 
quickly:  blessed  is  he  who  keeps   the  prophecy  of 

A  !,      K       .  u  "I""  ''''  '^^'^  *''"«^'  «"d  h^-rd  them. 
And  when  1  had  heard  and  seen,  I  fell  down  to  wor- 
ship before  the  feet  of  the  angel   who  shewed  me 
these  things.     Then  saith  he  unto  me.  See  thou  do 
't  not ;  for  I  am  thy  fellow-servant,  and  of  thy  breth- 
ren the  prophets,  and  of  them  which  keep  the  say- 
ings of  this  book :  worship  God.     And  he  saith  un- 
to me  Sea    not   the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this 
book,  for  the  time  is  at  hand.      He  that  I  unjus 
et  him  be  unjust  still ;  and  he   which  is  filthy  Te 
I'.n.  be  filthy  still;  he  that   is  righteous,  let  hfmbe 
righteous  still;    and   he  that   is    holv    1./ K        u 

;.o.y  still.     And  behold,  IcomeUt/d'"  re! 

nn^  at     h         V"/'^'"  ^"^  Omega,  the  begin- 
nmg  ami  the  end,  the  first  and  the  last."     |  L 
therefore    miif^    o*        i  ^^» 

ore,  quite   at  a  loss   to  comprehend  how  the 


».S!fe»...    ,/:**»"'- 


S' 


/. 


166 

Editor  can  justify  himself  in  ascribing  verses  6,   8, 
and  9,  to  one    being,   and  verse   7th  to  another,  in 
which  there  is  no  notice  whatsoever  of  a  new  speak- 
er.    2dlj.     There   is   only  one  agent  in  the  whole 
tram  of  these  verses,  extending  as  far  as  verse  20, 
and  no  unbiassed  mind  can,  in   tlie    face   of  all   the 
rules  of  composition,  reject  the  relation  of  a  verb  to 
an  appropriate   nominative  standiijg  before  it,  in  or- 
der to  refer  the  same  to   a   noun  which  is  not  found 
in  any  of  the  immediately  preceding  sentences.    3dly. 
Were  we  to  follow  the  example  of  the  Editor,  and 
refer  verses  6,  8,  and  9,  to  an   unknown  anijel,  and 
verse  7  abruptly  to  Jesus,  (which  1  conceive  we  can- 
not do,  without  defying  common  sense,  and   all   the 
acknowledged  laws  of  grammar,)  we  must  be  totally 
at  a  loss  to  account  for  the  strange  conduct  of  John 
towards  Jesus,  his  Master,  in  falling  down  to  worship 
before  the  feet  of  the   angel,   and  neglecting  Jesus 
entirely,  though  he    saw    and    heard  them   both    at 
one  time,  or  rather  his  vision  of  Jesus  was  subsequent 
to  that  of  the  angel.     4thly.     John  himself  explains 
whom  he  meant  by  the   angel   mentioned  in  xxii.  6, 
identifying  this  angel  with  Jesus,  expressly  named  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Revelation.     Ch.  xxii.  6  :  "  And 
the  Lord  God  of  the  holy  prophets  sent  his  angel  to 
shew  unto  his  servants  the  things  tvhich  must  shortly  be 
done,'"'     Ch.  i.  1  :  "  God  gave  unto    him,   (Jesus,)  to 
shew  unto  his  servants  things  which  must  shortly  come 
to  pass,^^     As  in    the    English   version   there  is  some 
ditference,  though  of  no   consequence,  in    these    two 
phrases,  I  therefore  quote    the   origi  nal,  containing 
the  precise  words  in  both  instances,  fyt(Cr((  lotg  dovXoii 


16 


I  hope  now  that  the  explanation  of  the  author  of 
the  book  of  Revelation,  joined  with  the  above-stat- 
ed circumstances,  will  not  fall  short  of  producing 
conviction  in  the  mind  of  the  Editor  and  my  other 
opponents. 

We  may  easily  find  out  the  angel  who  is  describ- 
ed in  the  latter  end  of  ch.  i.  1,  as  being  sent  by  Jesus, 
by   reference    to  ch.   xxii.   16:  "I  Jesus   have  sent 
mine   angel   to    testify  unto  you  these  things  in  the 
churches:'     We  find  here  two  things  distinctly  :  one, 
that  Jesus,  designated  as  an  angel  in  xxii.  6,  shewed, 
as  directed   by  God  in  ch.  i.  1,  all  things  which  must 
shortly  come  to  pass  ;  and  the  other,  that  he  sent  his 
angel  to  shew  to  John   and  his   other  servants  these 
things  in  the  churches,  respecting  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation, as  expressly  mentioned  in  verse  1  of  the 
book  of  Revelation,  as  well  as  in  xxii.  16.      5thly.    1 
will  now  have  recourse  to  the  rule  recommended  bv 
the  Editor,  "  that  when  the  speaker  is  not  expressly 
named,  his  language  designates  him."     As  the  phrase 
"I   come  quickly,"   found  elsewhere  in  the  book  of 
Revelation,  is  used  expressly  by  Jesus  as  speaker  in 
five  different  instances,  (ii.  5,  16,  iii.  11,  xxii.  12,  20,) 
we  must  naturally  ascribe  this  phrase  in  verse  7    to 
Jesus,  and  must,  therefore,  refer  the  immediately  fol- 
lowing verses  (8,9,)  to  him,  in  perfect  consistency  with 
all  other  scriptural  writings.     It  is  not  only  in  verse 
9  that  Jesus  calls  himself  a  servant  of  God,  and  ad- 
dresses Christians   as  brethren,  but  also  in  Matt.  xii. 
18,  he  represents  himself  as  a  chosen  servant  of  the 
Most  High  ;  and  in  xxviii.  10,   and  John  xx.    17,  de- 
siofnates  the  disciples  as  his  brethren. 


.■^i 


i^ 


iiantin ' 


,      • 


168 

If  the  Editor  should  say,  according  to  the  general 
mode  of  Trinitarian  exposition,  that  the  adoption  of 
such  designations  was  in  reference  to  the  human  ca- 
pacity of  Jesus,  he  will  perhaps  give  up  the  present 
difference  from   me,  under   the  supposition   that  in 
this  instance  also  Jesus   calls  himself  a   servant  of 
God,  and  his  followers  brethren,  as  well  as  forbids 
John  to  worship  him,  merely  in  his  human  capacity. 
I  now  conclude   my  reply  to  this  branch  of   the 
Editor's  argument,  with  a  few  remarks  in  allusion  to 
such  questions  of  the  Editor,  as   "  Is  it  that  the  Son 
of  God,  after  receiving  the  worship  of  the    highest 
archangel  at  God's  express  command,  forbade  John 
to  worship  him  f '  &c.       I  would  ask,  in  turn,  Can 
any  man  be  justified   in  ascribing  deity  to  one  whose 
language   is   this:   "As   1    received  of  my   Father;' 
(Rev.  ii.  27)  ;  "  I  have  not  found  thy  works  perfect 
before  God;'  (iii.  2);  'M  will  confess  his  name  before 
my  Father,  and  before  his  angels,"  (ver.  5) ;  "  Him 
that  overcomcth  will  I  make  a  pillar  in  the  temple 
of  my   God :  I  will  write  upon  him  the  name  of  my 
God,  and   the   name  of  the  city  of  my  God,  which 
Cometh  down  out  of  heaven  from  my  God''  ?  (Ver. 
12.)     Is  it  consistent  with  the  nature  of  God  to  ac- 
quire exaltation  through  merit?  Chap.  v.  12:  "Say- 
ing with  a  loud  voice,  Worthy  is  the  Lamb  that  was 
slain  to  receive   power,  and   riches,  and  wisdom,  and 
strength,  and  honor,  and  glory,  and  blessing."     Ch. 
111.  21  :    "To  him  that  overcomcth   will  I  grant  to  sit 
with  me  in  my  throne,  even   as  1  also  overcame,   and 
am  set  down  with  my  Father  in  his  throne."     Is  it  be- 
coming of  the  nature  of  God  to  sing  thus,  addressing 


169 

himself  to  another  being:  "Great  and   marvellous 
are  thy  works,   Lord  God  Almighty ;  just   and  true 
are  thy  ways,  thou  King  of  saints.     Who  shall  not 
fear  thee,  O  Lord,  and  glorify  thy  name  ?   for  thou 
ONLY  art  holy,"  &c.  ?  ch.  xv.  3,  4.    Is  not    the  Lamb 
throughout   the  whole   Revelation  mentioned  sepa- 
rately and  distinctly  from  God  ?      Ch.  i.  1  :    "  The 
Revelation  of  Jesus   Christ,   which  God  gave  unto 
him."     Ver.  2  :  "  Who  bare  record  of  the  word  of 
God,  and  of  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ,"     Vers. 
4,  5  :    "  And  peace  from  him  who  is,   and  who  was, 
and  who   is   to   come  ;  and  from  the   seven  spirits 
which  are  before  his  throne  ;  and  from  Jesus  Christ, 
who  is  the  faithful  witness,"     Ver.  9  :  "  For  the  word 
of  God,  and  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ."  Ch. 
V.  9 :  "  Thou  wast  slain,  and  hast  redeemed   us   to 
God."     Ver.  10  :  "  And  hast  made  us  unto  our  God 
kings  and  priests."     Ch.  xi.  15 :  "  The  kingdoms  of 
this  world  are  become   the  kingdoms    of  our  Lord, 
and  o/his  Christ."     Ch.  xii.    17:    "  Who   keep  the' 
commandments  of  God,  and  have    the   testimony  of 
Jesus  Christ,"     Ch.  xiv.  12:  "That    keep  the  com- 
mandments of  God,  and  the  faith  of  Jesus,"     Ch 
xxi.  23  :   "  For  the  glory  of  God  did  lighten  it,  and 
the  Lamb  is  the   light   thereof."     John  in  ascribing 
to  the  Lamb  most  honorary  epithets,  those  general- 
ly   printed  in  capitals,  takes  great  care  in  the  choice 
of  words.     Ch.  xix.    16:  "  He"  (the  Lamb)   "hath 
on  his  vesture  and  on  his  thigh  a  name  written.  King 
of  kings,  and  Lord  of  lords."     Ch.  xvii.  14  :  "  For  he 
(the  Lamb)  is  Lord  of  lords  and  King  of  kings."— 
The  apostle  never  once  declares  him  to  be  "God  of 

22 


M 


*  ■ 


•-4- 


170 

Gods,"  the  peculiar  epithet  of  the  Ahiiighty  Power. 
So  the  most  holy  saints  sing  first  the  song  of  Moses, 
and  then  that  of  the  Lamb ;  having  perhaps  had  in 
riew  the  priority  of  tlie  former  to  the  latter  in  point 
of  birth.  Ch.  xv.  3 :  "  And  they  (the  holy  saints) 
sing  the  song  of  Moses,  the  servant  of  God,  and  the 
^onor  of  the  Lamb." 

In  answer  to  one  of  the  many  insinuations  made 
by  the  Editor  in  the  course  of  his  arguments,  to  wit, 
**If  this  be  Christ,  what  must  become  of  the  pre- 
cepts of  Jesus?"  (page  576,)  I  most  reluctantly  put 
the  following  query  in  reply :  If  a  slain  lamb  be  God 
Almighty,  or  his  true  emblem,  what  must  be  his 
worship,  and  what  must  become  of  his  worshippers? 

On  the  attempt  to  prove  the  deity  of  Jesus  Christ 
by   comparing    Isaiah    xlv.    23,    ("Unto    me,"  i.  e. 
God,  "every  knee    shall    bow,   every   tongue  shall 
swear,")  with  Rom.   xiv.    10 — 12,   ("But  why  dost 
thou   judge  thy   brother?  or   why  dost  thou  set  at 
nought  thy  brother  ?  For  we  shall  all  stand  before 
the    judgment-seat  of  Christ.      For  it  is  written.  As 
1  live,  saith  the  Lord,  every  knee  shall  bow  to  xnc, 
and  every  tongue   shall  confess   to   God.     So,  then, 
every  one  of   us   shall  give    account    of   himself   to 
God,")  I  observed  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (page  288,) 
that  "  between  the  prophet  and  the  apostle  there  is 
a  perfect  agreement  in  substance,  since  both  declare 
that  it  is  to  God  that  every   knee  shall   bow   and 
every  tongue  shall  confess  through  htm  before  whose 
judgment-seat  we   shall  all  stand :  at  the  same  time 
both  Jesus  and  his  apostles  inform  us,  that  we  must 
?tand  before   the  judgment-seat   of  Christ,   becaiisr 


171 

the  Father  has  committed  the  office  of  final  judgment 
to  him."  To  which  the  answer  of  the  Editor  is  this, 
*•  We  here  beg  leave  to  ask  our  author,  where  the 
phrase  through  him  is  to  be  found?  It  must  be  in 
the  author's  copy  of  the  prophet  and  the  apostle — 
it  is  not  in  our's."  By  these  words  the  Editor  clear- 
ly means  to  insinuate,  that  the  words  in  question  are 
gratuitously  inserted  in  my  explanation,  and  without 
any  authority  in  the  holy  scriptures.  At  least  I 
am  otherwise  at  a  loss  to  understand  what  he  means 
by  saying,  that  the  words  of  my  paraphrase  are  not 
to  be  found  in  his  edition  of  the  Bible  ;  for  it  would 
be  unworthy  to  suppose  of  him  that  he  wished  to 
impress  his  readers  with  the  idea,  that  I  was  quot- 
ing a  particular  passage  falsely,  instead  of  the  fact 
that  I  was  only  giving  my  idea  of  its  import.  That 
I  was  fully  warranted  in  my  interpretation,  I  hope 
to  convince  the  Editor  himself,  by  referring  him  to 
the  following  passages,  in  which  it  is  expressly  de- 
clared that  it  is  through  Jesus  that  glory  and  thanks 
are  to  be  given  to  God,  and  that  we  have  peace  with 
God ;  and  also  that  it  is  by  Jesus  Christ  that  God 
judgeth  the  world.  Rom.  xvi.  27  :  "  To  God  only 
wise,  be  glory  through  Jesus  Christ  forever.  Amen." 
Ch.  V.  1.  "  We  have  peace  with  God  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  Gh.  i.  8 ;  "I  thank  my  God 
through  Jesus  Christ."  Ch.  ii.  16:  "In  the  day 
when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus 
Christ:'  2  Cor.  v.  18  :  "  All  things  are  of  God,  who 
hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,'''*  John 
V.  22:  "  For  the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  but  hath 
Committed  all    judgment  unto  the  Son."     After  cOn- 


^ 


,^> 


172 

sidering  these  texts,  no  one  can,  I  think,  refuse  to  ad- 
init  the  correctness  of  m^^  assertion,  tliat  it  is  to  God 
every  knee  shall  bow  through  Christ,  before  whose 
judgtnent-seat  we  shall  stand,  «  because  the  Father 
has  committed  the  office  of  final  judgment  to  him," 
as  being  founded  upon  the  best  authority  that  man 
can  appeal  to. 

Upon  the  interpretation  of  the  above-mentioned 
passage  of  Isaiah,  to  wit,  "  It  is  Jesus  that  swears 
here  by  himself,"  1  observed  in  my  Second  Appeal, 
«  How  can  they  escape  the  context,  which  expressly 
informs  us  that  Jehovah  God,  and  not  Jesus,  sware 
in  this  manner?"  To  this  the  Editor  replies,  that 
«'  the  Son  was  Jehovah  before  he  was  Jesus,"  &c. 
Is  not  this  merely  a  begging  of  the  question,  inas- 
much as  one  may  equally  assert  that  Moses  or  Josh- 
ua was  Jehovah  before  he  was  Moses  or  Joshua  ? 

He  further  says,   that   «  Jesus  is  so  preeminently 
Saviour,  that  there  is  salvation  in  no  other."     I  agree 
with  the  Editor  so  far  as  to  declare  Jesus  to  be,  un- 
der God,  the  only  Saviour  mentioned  in  the  records 
of  the   Christian  dispensation ;    but  previous  to   his 
birth  there  were  many  saviours  raised  by  God  to  save 
his  servants,  as  noticed  already  in  page  56  and  63. 
The  Editor  adds,   that   in  [Isaiah   xlv.]   ver   24 
righteousness  is  used  in  such  a  sense  as  is  principallJ 
applicable  to  the  Son.     I    therefore   transcribe  the 
vei^e,  that  the  reader  may  judge  whether  or  not  his 
position  has  any  foundation :  «  Surely,  shall  one  sa^ , 
in  the  Lord  have  I  righteousness  and  strength  :  evJn 
to  him  shall  men  come  ;  and  all  that  are  incensed 
against  him  shall  be  ashamed." 


173 

Respecting  the  attempt   to   prove   the   deity   of 
Jesus,  from  the  circumstance  of  his  being  figurative- 
ly represented   as  the  husband  or  the  supporter  of 
his  church,  John  iii.  29,   Eph.  v.  23,  and  also  God's 
being  called  the  husband  of  his  creatures,  Isaiah  liv. 
5 — I  requested  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (pp.  292,  293,) 
that  "  my  readers  would  be  pleased  to  examine  the 
language  employed  in  these  two  instances.     In  the 
one,  God  is   represented  as  the  husband  of  all  his 
creatures,  and  in  the  other,  Christ  is  declared  to  be 
the  husband,   or  the  head  of  his  followers :  there  is, 
therefore,  an  inequality  of  authority  evidently  as- 
cribed to  God  and  to  Jesus.     Moreover,  Christ  him- 
self shows  the  relation   that   existed  between  him 
and  his  church,  and  himself  and  God,  in  John  xv.    1 : 
'  1  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  husband- 
man.'   Ver.  5  :  '  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches,' 
&C.   Would  it  not  be  highly  unreasonable    to  set  at 
defiance  the  distinction  drawn  by  Jesus  between  God 
himself,  and  his  church  ?"    The  Editor  has  not  taken 
the  least  notice  of  this  last  argument ;  he  only  glanc- 
es over  the  former,  saying,  (page  579,)  "Had  our 
author  examined  the  context  with  sufficient  care  he 
would  have  found  that  those  to  whom  God  declares 
himself  the   husband,  are  so   far  from  being  all  his 
creatures     that  they   are  only  one    branch    of   his 
church,  the  Gentiles,  the  children  of  the  desolate,  in 
opposition  to  the  Jews,  the  children  of   the  married 

T!t  M  *  "'^'J'^.*^'- ''°^  the  choice  of  the  designation 

thy  Maker,"  m  Isaiah  liv.  5,  in  preference  to  oth- 

crs  and  its  true  force,  could  escape  the  notice  of  the 

Editor,  as  the  phrase  "  thy  Maker  is  thv  husband" 


174 


implies  in  a  general  sense  that  whosoever  is  the 
maker  is  also  the  preserver,  and,  consequently,  God 
is  the  husband,  or  the  preserver,  of  all  his  creatures, 
including  the  Jews  more  especially  as  his  chosen 
people.  I,  however,  wish  to  know  how  the  Editor 
justifies  himself  in  concluding  real  unity  between  God 
and  Jesus,  from  the  application  of  the  term  husband 
to  them,  while  Jesus  declares  the  relation  between 
God,  himself,  and  his  church,  to  be  such  as  that  ex- 
isting between  the  husbandman,  the  vine,  and  its 
branches. 

Some  orthodox  divines  having  attempted  to  es- 
tablish the  deity  of  Jesus,  by  comparing  Jer.  xxiii. 
5,  6,  ("  I  will  raise  unto  David  a  righteous  branch, 
and  a  king  shall  reign  and  prosper — and  this  is  his 
name  whereby  he  shall  be  called,  the  lord  our 
RIGHTEOUSNESS,")  with  1  Cor.  i.  30,  ("  Christ  Jesus, 
who  of  God  is  made  unto  us  wisdom,  and  righteous- 
ness," &c.,)  I  replied,  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (page 
286,)  that  "  I  only  refer  my  readers  again  to  the 
passage  in  Jer.  xxxiii.  16,  in  which  Jerusalem  also  is 
called  '  THE  LORD  OUR  RKiHTEousNEss,'  and  to  the 
phrase,  'is  made  unions  of  God,"  found  in  the  passage 
in  question,  and  expressing  the  inferiority  of  Jesus  to 
God;  and  also  to  2  Cor.  v.  21,  'that  we  might  be 
made  the  riorhteousness  of  God  in  him;'  where  St. 
Paul  says,  that  all  Christians  may  '  be  made  the 
righteousness  of  God  ;' "  to  which  the  Rev.  Editor 
thus  replies  (page  580) :  "  This  does  not  at  all  affect 
the  question  in  hand,  which  is  simply,  whether  this 
righteous  branch  of  David,  this  king,  who  shall  reign 
and  prosper,  bo  Jesus  Christ   or  not  :  and  to  prove 


175 

this,  we  need  only  call  in  the  testimony  of  the  angel 
to  Mary,  Luke  i.  32,  33,  '  The  Lord  God  shall  give 
unto  him  the  throne  of  his  father  David :  and  he 
shall  reiffn  over  the  house  of  Jacob  forever.'"  The 
Editor  here  overlooks  again  the  force  of  the  phrase, 
"  God  shall  give  unto  him  (Jesus)  the  throne  of  his 
father  David,"  implying,  that  the  throne  and  ex- 
altation which  Jesus  was  possessed  of,  was  but  the 
free  gift  of  God. 

To  lessen  the  force  of  such  phrases  as  '*  being 
7nade  of  God,"  "God  shall  give  unto  him,"  &;c.  the 
Editor  adds,  that,  "  relative  to  his  '  being  made  of 
God  righteousness  to  us,'  this  can  of  course  make 
no  alteration  in  the  Son's  eternal  nature."  I  there- 
fore beor  to  ask  the  Editor,  if  one's  beins:  made  bv 
another  any  thing  whatsoever  that  he  was  not  be- 
fore, does  not  tend  to  prove  his  mutable  nature,  what 
nature,  then,  can  be  called  mutable  in  this  transitory 
world  ?  The  Editor  again  advances,  that  Jesus  "  was 
Jehovah  before  he  became  incarnate,"  &:c.  This  is 
a  bare  assertion  which  I  must  maintain  to  be  with- 
out any  ground,  unless  he  means  to  advance  the  doc- 
trine, that  souls  are  emanations  of  God  and  proceed 
from  the  deity. 

As  to  Jerusalem  being  called,  "Jehovah  our  right- 
eousness," the  Editor  says,  "  We  may  observe,  tliat 
it  is  the  church  of  Christ,  the  holy  Jerusalem,  who 
bears  this  name,  to  the  honor  of  her  glorious  head 
and  husband,  who  is,  indeed,  Jehovah  her  righteous- 
ness." (Page  581.)  Let  us  reflect  on  this  answer 
of  the  Editor.  In  the  first  place,  the  term  Jerusa- 
lem, in  Jer.  xxxiii.  16,  from  its  association  with  the 


\ 


176 

term  ••  Judah,'"  is  understood  as  signifying  the  well- 
known  holy  city  in  that  kingdom,  having  no  reference 
to  the  church  and  followers  of  Christ.  In  the  sec- 
ond place,  if  the  Editor  understands  by  the  term 
"Jerusalem,"  here,  the  church  of  Christ,  and  admits 
of  Jerusalem  being  liguratively  called  "Jehovah  our 
righteousness,"  on  the  ground  that  Christ  is  its  head, 
and  that,  consequently,  it  bears  that  name  "  to  the 
hanor  of  her  glorious  head:'  though,  in  reality,  difler- 
cnt  from  and  subordinate  to  him,  how  can  he  reject 
the  figurative  application  of  the  phrase  "Jehovah 
our  righteousness"  to  Jesus,  on  the  same  ground  and 
same  principle,  which  is,  that  as  Jehovah  is  the  head 
of  Christ,  consequently  Christ  bears  this  name  "  to 
the  honor  of  his  head:'  though,  in  reality,  different 
from  and  subordinate  to  God  ?  Vide  1  Cor.  xi.  3  : 
"  But  1  would  have  you  know,  that  the  head  of  ev- 
ery man  is  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  woman  is  the 
man,  and  the  head  of  Christ  is  God." 

The  Editor  shews  an  instance  in  Isaiah,  in  which 
seven  women  wish  to  be  called  by  the  name  of  a 
husband,  to  have  their  reproach  taken  away.  He 
must  also  know,  that  thousands  of  sons  and  de- 
scendants are  called  by  the  name  of  one  of  their 
fathers,  and  servants  by  the  name  of  their  mas- 
ters, to  the  honor  of  the  father  or  the  master.  Vide 
Isaiah  xlviii.  1  ;  Gen.  xliii.  6  ;  Hosea  xi.  8,  9  ;  Exod. 
xxiii.  21.  The  Editor  then  proceeds  to  divide  the 
honorary  names,  found  in  scripture,  into  two  kinds; 
one  given  by  men,  and  the  other  given  by  God ;  but 
he  must  know  that  the  names  given  by  prophets, 
or  bv  common  men,  if  used  and  confirmed   by  God. 


17 


or  by  any  of  the  sacred  writers,  become  as  worthy 
of  attention  as  if  they  had  been  bestowed  originally 
by  the  Deity  himself. 

The  Editor  again  uses  the  following  words,  "The 
incommunicable   name   Jehovah,"   the   self-existent, 
from  the    verb    tl^ll    hawah,  "  to  be  or  to    exist," 
"  which  is  applied   to  no  one   throughout  the  scrip- 
ture besides  the  sacred  three,"  &c.     We  know  very 
numerous  instances  in  which  the  name  "  Jehovah"  is 
applied  to  the  most  sacred  God,  but  never  met  with 
an  instance  of  applying  to  two  other  sacred  persons 
the  simple  term  "  Jehovah."    I  wish  the  Editor  had 
been  good  enough  to  have  taken  into  consideration 
that  this  is  the  very  point   in   dispute,   and  to   have 
shown  instances  in  which  the  second  and  third  per- 
sons of  the  deity  (according  to  the  Editor's  expres- 
sion) arc  addressed  by  this  name.     He  further  ob- 
serves, that  "  no  one  supposes  that  Jehovah-Jireh, 
"  God  will  see  or  provide,"  given  by  Abraham   to 
the  place  where  he  offered  Isaac,  was  intended  to 
deify  that  place,  but  to  perpetuate  the  fact  that  the 
Lord  did  there  provide  a  sacrifice  instead  of  Isaac; 
— that  Jehovah-nissi,  "God,  my  banner,"  given  by 
Moses  to  his  altar,  intended  any  thing  more  than 
that  God  was  his  banner  against  the  Amalekites; — 
that  Jehovah-tsidkenu,  "Jehovah  our  righteousness," 
the  name   men   should   call   Jerusalem,  or  Christ's 
church,  was  intended  to  deify  laer,  but  to  demon- 
strate that  her  Lord  and  head,  who  is  righteousness, 
is  indeed  Jehovah."     Here  I  follow  the  very  same 
mode  of  interpretation,  adopted  by  the  Editor,  in 
<'xplaining  the  same  phrase,   "The  Lord  our  right* 

23 


J  78 

cousness,"  found  in  Jer.  xxiii.  6,  referred  to  the  Mes- 
siah ;  that  is,  the  apphcation  of  this  phrase  to  the 
Messiah  does  not  deify  him,  but  demonstrates,  that 
his  Father,  his  employer,  his  head,  the   Most  High, 
who  is  his  rigfiteousness,  is  the   Lord  Jehovah  ;  so 
that  consistency  cannot   be  overlooked  which  pre- 
vails through  all  the  phrases  of  a  similar  nature  ;  for 
as  Christ  is  represented  to  be  the  head  of  his  church, 
so  God  is  represented  to  be  the  head  of  Christ,  as 
f  noticed  in  the  foregoing  page    176.      Lastly,  the 
Editor  says,  "Compound  names,  therefore,  do  not 
of  themselves  express  deity,  but  they  express  facts 
more  strongly  than  simple  assertions  or  propositions.'' 
I  am  glad  to  observe,  that  he  differs  from  a  great 
many  of  his  colleagues,  in  their  attempt  to  deify  the 
Messiah  from  the  application  of  the  above  phrase  to 
him ;  but  as  to  the  facts  demonstrated  by  this  phrase, 
they  may  be  easily  ascertained  from  comparing  the 
application  of  it  with  that  of  exactly  similar  phrases 
to  others,  as  I  have  just  observed. 

The  Editor  now  mentions  (page  583)  a  few  more 
passages  which,  he  thinks,  tend  to  "  illustrate,  not 
so  much  the  name  as  the  divine  nature  of  the  Son. 
Jn  Jer.  v.  22,  we  have  this  expostulation;  '  Fear  ye 
not  me  ?  saith  the  Lord.  Will  ye  not  tremble  at  my 
presence,  who  have  placed  the  sand  for  the  bound  of 
the  sea,  by  a  perpetual  decree,  that  it  cannot  pass  it: 
and  though  the  waves  toss  themselves,  yet  can  thev 
not  prevail  T  This,  however,  is  only  a  part  of  that 
work  of  creation  ascribed  to  him,  who,  while  on 
earth,  exercised  absolute  dominion  over  the  winds 
and  the   waves   in  no  name   beside  his  oxrn.'''^     But 


179 

what  this  passage  of  Jeremiah  has  to  do  with  the 
divine  nature  of  Jesus,  I  am  unable  to  discover. — 
The  Editor  might  have  quoted,  at  this  rate,  all  the 
passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  that  ascribe  to  God 
the  supreme  control  over  the  whole  world,  as  evi- 
dence in  favor  of  the  deity  of  Jesus,  as  he  was  sure 
to  find  always  many  persons  of  the  same  persuasion 
to  applaud  any  thing  offered  in  favor  of  the  Trinity. 

As  to  his  position,  that  Jesus  "exercised  absolute 
dominion  over  the  winds  and  the  waves  in  no  name 
beside  his  own,"  I  beg  to  quote  John  x.  25,  to  shew, 
that  whatever  power  Jesus,  in  common  with  other 
prophets,  exercised  over  wind  and  water  while  he 
was  on  earth,  he  did  it  in  the  name  of  God  :  "  Jesus 
answered  them,  1  told  you,  and  ye  believed  not ;  the 
works  that  I  do  in  my  Fathcr^s  name,  they  bear  wit- 
ness of  me."  "  And  Jesus  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  said, 
Father,  1  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard  me."  I 
say  Jesus,  in  common  with  other  prophets,  because 
both  Elijah  and  Elisha  the  prophets,  exercised  pow- 
er over  wind  and  water  and  other  things,  like  Jesus> 
in  the  name  of  the  Father  of  the  universe.  1  Kings 
xvii.  1,  xviii.  44,  45  ;  2  Kings  ii.  21  ;  sometimes  with- 
out verbally  expressing  the  name  of  God;  ch.  v.  8 
—13,  27,  ch.  ii.  10. 

Upon  the  assertion  in  my  Second  Appeal,  that  the 
"  epithet  God  is  frequently  applied  in  the  sacred 
scriptures  to  others  beside  the  Supreme  Being,"  the 
Editor  observes,  that  "  this  objection  Jeremiah  cuts 
up,  ch.  X.  11  :  '  The  gods  that  have  not  made  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  even  they  shall  perish  from 
the  earth,   and  from   under   these   heavens  ;'  which 


^    ( 


lao 


declaration  sweeps  away  not  only  the   gods  of  the 
heathen,  but   all   magisterial  gods,   and  even  Moses 
himself,  as  far  as   he   aspired   to   the  godhead :   but 
from  this  general  wreck  of  our  author's  gods,  Christ 
is  excepted,  he  having  made  these  heavens,  and  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  earth."     Let  us  apply  this  rule 
adopted  by    the   Editor  respecting  the    prophets,  to 
Jesus  Christ.     We  do  not  find  him  once  represented 
in  the  scriptures  as  the  maker  of  heavens  and  earth ; 
this  peculiar  attribute  having   been   throughout   the 
whole   sacred  writings  ascribed  exclusively  to  God 
the  Most  High.     As  to  the  instances  pointed  out  by 
the  Editor,  Heb.  i.  10,  and  Col.  i.  17, 1  fully  explain- 
ed them  in  pp.  97,  98  and  101,  as  having  reference  to 
God  the  Father  of  the  universe.     Moreover,  we  ob- 
serve in  the  New  Testament,  even  in  the  same  book 
of  Hebrews,  that  whatever  things  Jesus  made  ordid» 
he  accomplished  as  an  instrument   in  the   hands  of 
God.     Heb.  i.    2  :"  Whom  he   hath  appointed   heir 
of  all   things,  by  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds." 
Eph.  iii.  9  :  '•  Who  created  all  things  by  Jesus  Christ." 
It  would,  indeed,  be  very  strange  to  our  faculties  to 
acknowledge  one  as  the  true  God,  and  yet  to  main- 
tain the  idea  that  he  created  things  by  the  directions 
of  another  being,  and  was  appointed  as  heir  of  all 
things  by  that  other.     Again,  in  pursuance    of   the 
same  rule  of  the  Editor,  J  find  that  Jesus,  like  other 
perishable   gods,   both  died  and  was  buried,  though 
raised  afterwards  by  his  Father,  who  had  the  pow- 
•r  of  raising  Elijah  to  heaven,  even  without  suflfering 
him  to  die  and  be  buried  for  a  single  day.      My  read- 
ers may  now  judge  whether  Jesus  Christ  be  not  m- 


181 


eluded,  in  common  with  other  perishable  gods,  in  the 
rule  laid  down  by  the  Editor. 

To  deify  Jesus  Christ,  the  Editor  again   introduc- 
es the  circumstance  of  his  being  a  searcher  of  hearts 
to  execute  judgment,  Rev.  ii.   23,  and   also  quotes 
Heb.  i.  3.     Having  examined   these   arguments   in 
pages  99  and  162,   I  will  not  return   to  them  here. 

He  adds,  in  this  instance,  "  We  are  hence  assured 
that  the  Father,  who  perfectly  knows  the  Son,  did 
not  commit  to  him  all  judgment  so  entirely  as  to 
judge  no  man  himself,  without  knowing  his  infinite 
fitness  for  the  work."  It  is  evident  that  the  Father 
did  not  commit  to  the  Son  all  judgment  so  entirely 
as  to  judge  no  man  himself,  without  qualifying  him 
for  so  doing,  that  is,  without  giving  him  the  power 
of  knowing  all  the  events  of  this  world  in  order  to 
the  distribution  of  rewards  and  punishments.  Matt. 
xxviii.  18:  ^' All  power  h  given  unto  me  in  heaven 
and  in  earth."  Notwithstanding  this,  the  power  of 
knowing  those  things  that  do  not  respect  the  execu- 
tion of  judgment  by  the  Son,  is  not  bestowed  upon 
him,  and  the  Son,  therefore,  is  totally  ignorant  of 
them.  Mark  xiii.  32  :  "  But  of  that  day  and  that 
hour  knoweth  no  man;  no,  not  the  angels  which  are 
m  heaven ;  neither  the  Son^  but  the  Father."  No 
one  destitute  of  the  power  of  omniscience  is  ever 
acknowledged  as  Supreme  God  by  any  sect  that  be- 
lieve in  revealed  religion. 

He  quotes  Heb.  iv.  13,  "Neither  is  there  any 
creature  that  is  not  manifest  in  his  sight ;  but  all 
things  are  naked  and  opened  unto  the  eyes  of  him 
with  whom  we  have  to  do,"  in  order  to  corroborate 


t^ 


< 


1«2 

the  idea  that  Christ   knew   all   tlie   secrets  of  nieu. 
Supposing   this  passage    to  be   applicable   to   Jesus 
Christ,  it  does  not  convey  any  other  idea  than   what 
is  understood  by  Rev.  ii.  23,  which   I   have   already 
noticed.     But  the  Editor  must  know  that  in  the  im- 
mediately preceding  verse,  the  word  of  God,  or  Rev- 
elation, while  figuratively  represented  as  a  two-edo-- 
ed  sword,  &c.  is  in  the  same  allegorical  sense  declar- 
ed to  be  "  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents  of 
the  heart."     There  is,  therefore,  no  inconsistency  in 
ascribing  the  knowledge  of  the  intents  of  hearts  to 
him  through  whom  that  revelation  is  communicated, 
and  who  is  appointed  to  judge  whether  the  conduct 
of  men    is   regulated   by  them  in  conformity  to  that 
Revelation. 

^  The  Editor  says,  (page  581,)  that  "  in  Ezck.  xxviii. 
God  says,  respecting  a  man  who  arrogated  to  him- 
self the  honors  of  Godhead,  'Son  of  man,  say  unto 
the  prince  of  Tyrus,  Thus,  saith  the  Lord  God  ;— 
Because  thy  heart  is  lifted  up,  and  thou  hast  said  I 
am  a  God, — behold,  thou  shalt  die  the  death  of  the 
uncircumcised,'  kc.  How  different  the  Father's  lan- 
guage to  the  Son  :  '  Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  forever 
and  ever.'  Why  this  different  language  to  the  prince 
of  Tyrus  and  to  Jesus  f  Had  the  Editor  attentively 
referred  to  the  scriptures,  he  would  not  have  taken 
the  trouble  of  putting  this  question  to  me  ;  for  he 
would  have  easily  found  the  reason  for  this  difference  ; 
that  is,  the  king  of  Tyrus  called  himself  God,  as 
above-stated  ;  but  Jesus,  so  far  from  robbing  the 
Deity  of  his  honor,  never  ceased  to  confess  that  God 
was  both  his  God  and  his  Father.     (John  xx.    J7.) 


< 


183 


Also,  that  the  prince  of  Tyrus  manifested  disobedi- 
ence to  God  ;  but  Jesus  even  laid  down  his  life  in 
submission  to  the  purposes  of  God,  and  attributed  di- 
vine favor  towards  himself  to  his  entire  obedience 
to  the  Most  High.  Rom.  v.  19  :  For  as  by  one 
man's  disobedience,  many  were  made  sinners,  so  by 
the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous." 
John  X.  17  :  "  Therefore  doth  my  Father  love  me, 
because  I  lay  down  my  life,  that  I  might  take  it 
again."  Luke  xxii.  42  :  "  Father,  if  thou  be  willing, 
remove  this  cup  from  me :  nevertheless,  not  my  will 
but  thine  be  done."  As  the  conduct  of  the  prince 
and  that  of  Jesus  towards  God  were  quite  different, 
they  were  differently  treated  by  the  Father  of  the 
universe  :  As  to  the  above  verse,  ("  Thy  throne,  O 
God,  is  forever  and  ever,")  God  does  not  peculiarly 
address  Jesus  with  the  epithet  God,  but  he  also  uses 
for  the  chiefs  of  Israel  and  for  Moses  the  same 
epithet. 

The  Editor  quotes  1  Cor.  iv.  5 :  "  Judge  nothing 
before  the  time,  until  the  Lord  come,  who  both  will 
bring  to  light  the  hidden  things  of  darkness,  and  will 
make  manifest  the  counsels  of  the  heart ;  and  then 
shall  every  man  have  praise  of  God."  The  pas- 
sage simply  amounts  to  this:  "Judge  not  either 
me  or  others  before  the  time,  until  the  Lord 
come,  who  will  bring  to  light  the  dark  and  secret 
counsels  of  men's  hearts,  in  preaching  the  gospel; 
and  then  shall  every  one  have  that  praise,  that 
estimate  set  upon  him,  by  God  himself,  which  he 
truly  deserves." — Locke, 

It  is  not  Jesus  alone  that  was  empowered  by  God 


184 

to  know  and  to  judge  all  secret  events  ;  but,  on  par^ 
ticular    occasions,  others    were    intrusted  with    the 
same   power,  as   has  aheady   been   noticed    in   page 
162  and  will  also  be  found  in  Dan.  ii.  23  :  "1  thank 
thee,  and   praise  thee,  O    thou  God  of  my    fathers, 
who   hast    given   me    wisdom   and   might,  and   hast 
made  known  unto  me  now  what  we  desired  of  thee; 
for  thou  hast  now   made  known  unto  us    the   king's 
matter."     And  in  2   Sam.    xiv.    19,   20:  "And   the 
king  (David)  said,  Is  not  the  hand  of  Joab  with  thee 
in  all  this  ?    And  the  woman  answered  and  said.  My 
Lord  is  wise,   according  to  the  wisdom  of  an  angel 
of  God,   to  know  all  things   that  are  in  the  earth." 
1   Cor.   vi.  2,  3  :     "  Do  ye    not  know  that  the  saints 
shall  judge   the   world  ?  and   if  the  world  shall   be 
judged  by  you,  are  ye  unworthy  to  judge  the  small- 
est   matters  ?    Know  ye  not  that  we  shall  judge  an- 
gels?" kc.     Here  Christian  saints  are  declared  to  be 
judges   of  the   deeds   of  the    whole    world,    and  of 
course  to  be  possessors  of  a  knowledge  of  all  events, 
both  public   and    private,   so  as   to   enable    them  to 
perform  so  delicate  a  judgment.      Besides,  a  knowl- 
edge of  future  events  is  by  no  means  less  wonderful 
than  that  of  past  things  or  present  secrets  of  hearts; 
yet  we  find  all    the    prophets  of  God  were  endued 
with    the    former.       1    Kings    xx.    22:     "And    the 
prophet  came   to  the   king  of  Israel,  and  said  unto 
him.  Go,  strengthen  thyself,  and  mark,  and  see  what 
thou  doest ;  for  at  the    return  of   the  year  the  king 
of  Syria  will  come  up  against  thee."     So  we  find  the 
same  gift  of  future  knowledge  granted  to  righteous 
men  in  numerous  instances. 


185 

He  then  cites  Dan.  i.  and  vii.  and  founds  upon  them 
the  following  question :  "  If,  then,  by  nature  he  was 
not  God,  by  nature  the  creator  of  heaven  and  earth, 
he  and   his   kingdom  must   perish  from   under  the 
heavens."     To  this   my  reply  is,  that  we  find  Jesus 
subjected  to  the  death  of   the  cross  while  on  earth, 
and,  after  the  general  resurrection,  to  Him  that  put 
all  things  under  him.     (1  Cor.  xv.  28.)     The  Son, 
therefore,  is  not  by  nature  God,  the  creator  of  heav- 
en and  earth.     As  to   the   sophistry  that  attributes 
the  death  and  subjugation  of  Jesus  only  to  his  human 
capacity,  it  might  be  applicable  to  every  human  indi- 
vidual,  alleging  that  they,  being  the  children  of  Ad- 
am, the  son  of  God,  (Luke  iii.  38,)  arc  possessed  of 
a  divine  nature  also,  and  that  their  death,  consequent- 
ly, IS  m  their  human  capacity  alone,  but  that  in  their 
divine  nature   they   cannot   be   subjected  to  death. 
(Vide  pp.  113—118  of  this  Essay.) 

By  applying  to  Jesus  the  epithet  "most  holy," 
found  in  Dan.  ix.  24,  the  Editor  attempts  to  prove 
the  eternal  deity  of  the  Son,  forgetting,  perhaps, 
that  the  same  term  "  most  holy"  is  applied  in  the 
scriptures  even  to  inanimate  things.  Numb,  xviii.  10  : 
"  In  the  most  holy  place  shalt  thou  eat  it."  Exod. 
xxix.  37 :  "  It  shall  be  an  altar  most  holy." 

The  Editor,  in  noticing  Hosea,  says,  that  "the 
evangelist's  quoting  this  passage,  ('Out  of  Egypt 
have  1  called  my  son,')  plainly  shows  that  it  referred 
to  Christ  as  well  as  to  Israel ;  but  the  difference  is 
manifest :  Israel  was  God's  adopted  son,  constantly 
rebelling  against  his  Father;  Jesus  was  God's  prop- 
er son,  of  the  same  nature  with  his  Father,  (as  is  ev- 

24 


( 


18G 


ery  proper  son,)  and  did  always  what  pleased  him.'* 
This  assertion  of  the  Editor,  that  "  Israel  was  God's 
adopted  son,"    is,  I  think,   without   foundation ;  for 
they  are  declared,  like  Jesus,  to  be  begotten  sons  of 
God;  but  were  not,  like  Christ,  entirely  devoted  to 
the  will  of  the  Father  of  the  universe.     Deut.  xxxii. 
18  :  "Of  the  Rock  that  begat  thee  thou  art  unmind- 
ful,  and   hast   forgotten    God    that    formed    thee." 
Exod.  iv.  22  :  "  And   thou  shalt  say  unto  Pharaoh, 
Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Israel  is  my  son,  even  niy  first- 
bom.^^     He  then  quotes  Hosea    iii.   5  :  "  Afterward 
shall  the  children  of  Israel  return,  and  seek  the  Lord 
their  God,  and  David  their  king."     On  which  he 
comments  that  David  had  then  been  in  his  grave — 
he  could  be  sought   only  in   heaven : — as  David,  in 
common  with  other  saints,  could  not  search  the  heart 
and  know  the  sincerity  of  prayers,   this   prophecy 
must  be  assigned  to  the  son  of  David,  the  Messiah. 
1  really  regret  to  observe,  that  as  the  Jews  endeav- 
or to  misinterpret  such  passages  as  are  most  favora- 
ble to  the  idea  of  Jesus  being  the  expected  Messiah, 
so  Christians,  in  general,   try  to  refer  to  Jesus  any 
passages  that  can   possibly   be  explained  as   bearing 
the  least  allusion  to  their  notion  of  the  Messiah,  how- 
ever distant  in  fact  they  may  be  from  such  a  notion. 
By  so  doing,  they  both  only  weaken  their  respective 
opinions.     The  above  citation,  on    which  the  Editor 
now  dwells,  is  an  instance.     Let  us  refer  to  the  text 
of  Hosea  iii.  4:  "For  the   children  of   Israel    shall 
abide  many  days  without  a  king,  and  without  a  prince, 
and  without  a  sacrifice,  and  without  an  image,  and 
without  an  ephod,  and  without  teraphim."     Ver.  ^  : 


187 


'•  Afterward  shall  the  children  of  Israel  return,  and 
seek  the  Lord  their  God,  and  David  their  king,  and 
shall  fear  the  Lord  and  his  goodness  in  the  latter 
days."  Does  not  the  poetical  language  of  the  proph- 
et determine  to  the  satisfaction  of  every  unbiassed 
man,  that,  after  long  sufferings,  Israel  will  repent  of 
their  disobedience,  and  seek  the  protection  of  their 
God,  and  the  happiness  which  their  fathers  enjoyed 
during  the  reign  of  David  ?  as  it  is  very  natural  for 
a  nation  or  tribe,  when  oppressed  by  foreign  con- 
querors, to  remember  their  own  ancient  kings,  under 
whose  governments  their  fathers  were  prosperous, 
and  to  wish  a  return  of  their  reign,  if  possible.  If 
the  Editor  insist  upon  referring  this  prophecy  to 
Jesus,  he  must  wait  its  fulfilment ;  as  Israel  has 
not  as  yet  sought  Jesus,  as  the  son  of  David,  the 
Messiah,  who  was  promised  to  them. 

The  Editor  says,  (page  586,)  that  Peter,  in  Acts 
ii.  21,  applies  to  Jesus  Joel  ii.  whereby  he  identifies 
Jehovali  with  him  :  but  we  find  Peter  here  quoting 
only  a  part  of  Joel  ii.  32  :  '*  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that  whosoever  shall  call  on  the  name  of  the 
Lord  shall  be  saved."  So  far  from  applying  this  to 
the  Son,  and  identifying  him  with  God,  the  apostle 
explains,  in  the  immediately  following  verse,  (22,) 
his  nature,  and  his  total  subordination  to  God  :  "  Ye 
men  of  Israel,  hear  these  words ;  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
a  man  approved  of  God  among  you  by  miracles  and 
wonders  and  signs,  which  God  did  by  him  in  the 
midst  of  you,"  (fee.  The  Editor  then  adds,  that  Paul 
also  addressed  himself  "  to  all  who,  in  every  place, 
call  on  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."     (1  Cor. 


i.  2).   1  tiiercfore  quote   Locke's  paraphrase  on  this 
verse,  as  well  as  his  note  oii  Rom.  x.  13,  with  a  view 
to  shew  the  Editor,   that  the   phrase,  "call   on  the 
name  of  Jesus,"  is  not  a  correct  translation  in  the 
English  version.     "To  the  church  of  God,  which  is 
at  Corinth,  to  them   that   are   separated  from  the 
rest  of  the  world,  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  called  to 
be  saints,  with    all    that   are   every  where  called  by 
the   name    of  Jesus  Christ,  their  Lord   and   ours.'' 
{Locke  on  1  Cor.  i.  2.)      Note  on  Rom.  x.   13,  page 
384  :    "  Whosoever    hath,   with    care,   looked  into 
St.   Paul's   writings,  must   own   him    to  be  a    close 
reasoner,  that  argues  to  the  point ;  and  therefore,  if, 
m  the  three  preceding  verses,  he  requires  an  open 
profession  of  the  gospel,  1  cannot  but  think,  that  'all 
that  call  upon  him,'  (verse  12,)  signifies,  all  that  are 
open,  professed  Christians;  and  if  this  be  the  meaning 
of  calling  upon  him,'  (ver.  12,)  it  is  plain  it  must  be 
the  meaning  of  '  calling  upon  his  name,'  (ver.  13,)  a 
phrase  not  very   remote   from   '  naming  his  name,' 
which  is  used  by  St.  Paul  for  professing  Christianity, 
2  Tim.  ii.  19.      If  the  meaning  of   the   prophet  Joel, 
from  whom  these  words  are  taken,  be  urged,  I  shall 
only  say,  that  it  will  be  an  ill  rule  for  interpreting  St. 
Paul,  to  tie  up  his  use  of  any  text   he  brings  out  of 
the  Old  Testament,  to  that  which  is  taken  to  be  the 
meaning  of  it  there.     We  need  go  no  farther  for  an 
example  than  the  6th,  7th,  and  8th  verses  of  this 
chapter,  which  I  desire  any   one    to   read  as  they 
stand,  (Deut.  xxx.  1 1—14,)  and  see  whether  St.  Paul 
uses  them  here,  in  the  same  sense."     If  the  Editor 
still  insists  upon  the   accuracy  of  the  translation  of 


189 

the  phrase,  "  call  upon  the  name  of  Jesus,"  found  m 

the  version,  he  will,  1  hope,  refer  to  Matt.  x.  40 

42:  "He  that  receiveth  you  receiveth  mc,  and  he 
that  receiveth  me  receiveth  him  that  sent  me.  He 
that  receiveth  a  prophet  in  the  name  of  a  prophet, 
shall  receive  a  prophet's  reward,  &:c. — And  whoso- 
ever shall  give  to  drink  unto  one  of  these  httle  ones 
a  cup  of  cold  water  only  in  the  name  of  a  disciple, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  he  shall  in  no  wise  lose  his  re- 
ward ;" — when  he  will  perceive,  that  calling  on  the 
name  of  Jesus,  as  being  the  Messiah  sent  by  God,  is 
an  indirect  call  on  the  name  of  God ;  in  the  same 
manner  as  one's  yielding  to  a  general  sent  by  a  king, 
amounts  to  his  submission  to  the  king  himself,  and 
secures  for  him  the  same  favor  of  the  king  as  if  he 
had  yielded  directly  to  the  sovereign. 

The  Editor  then  quotes  Amos  iv.  13,  perhaps  on 
account  of  its  containing  the  phrase,  "declaring  unto 
man  what  is  his  thought."  As  I  have  noticed  this 
subject  already,  oftener  than  once,  pages  162  and 
183,  1  will  not  return  to  it  here. 

He  again  quotes  Zech.  iii.  2  :  "And  Jehovah  said 
unto  Satan,  Jehovah  rebuke  thee,  O  Satan;  even 
Jehovah  that  hath  chosen  Jerusalem,  rebuke  thee  : 
Is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  out  of  the  fire  ?"  The 
Editor  then  proceeds  to  say,  that  "this  passage, 
with  ch.  ii.  8,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts.  After 
the  glory  hath  he  sent  me,'  and  ch.  xiii.  7,  'Awake, 
O  sword,  against  my  shepherd,  against  the  man  who 
is  my  fellow,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,'  forms  another 
three-fold  testimony  of  the  distinct  personality  of 
the  Son,  and  his  equality  with  the  Father."     I   am 


! 


unable  to  discover  exactly  what   the  Editor  inteiuU 
by  his  two  first   two    quotations.      With   respect    to 
the  former,  that  '*  Jehovah  said  unto  Satan,  Jehovah 
rebuke   thee,"  <fec.   the  Editor  must    be  well    aware 
that  God  speaks  of  himself,  very  frequently,  through- 
out the  sacred  books,  in  the  third  person,  instead  of 
the  first.     Isaiah    li.    1  :  "  Hearken   to   me,  ve   that 
follow  after  righteousness,  ye   that  seek  the   Lord," 
&:c.  15  :  "But  1  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  that  divided 
the  sea,  whose  waves  roared  :   The  Lord  of  hosts  is 
his   name."     Even  in  this   \c\y  book  of  Zcchariah. 
w^e   find  that   the   prophet  speaks  of  himself  some- 
times in  the   third  person.     Zech.  i.  7  :  "  In  the  sec- 
ond year  of  Darius,   came    the    word    of    Jehovah 
unto  Zechariah,"  &:c.  vii.  8  :  "And   the  word  of  the 
Lord  came   unto  Zcchariah,   saying,"  kc.      Neither 
God's  nor  Zechariah's  speaking  of   himself,  in    the 
third  person,  in  poetical  language,  can  be  construed 
into  a  proof  of  the  plurality  of  either  of  their  per- 
sons, or  of  the  equality  of  either  with  some  other 
being.     The  fact  is,   that  Zechariah   prophecies,  in 
the  second  year  of  Darius,    king  of   Persia,   of  the 
Lord's  will  to  build  the  second  temple  of  Jerusalem, 
by  Joshua,  Zorubbabel  and  Semuh  ;  and   to  rebuke 
Satan,  who  would  discourage  Joshua,  the  high-pricsf, 
from  that  undertaking;  as   is  evident   from  the  fol- 
lowing passage.     Zech.  i.  1  :     "  In  the  eighth  month, 
in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  came  the  word  of  the 
Lord  to  Zechariah,"  kc.  16  :  "  Therefore,  thus  saith 
the  Lord,  lam  returned  to  Jerusalem  with  mercies: 
my  house  shall  be  built  in  it,  saith  the  Lord  of  host-, 
and  a  line  shall  be  stretched  forth  upon  Jerusalem" 


191 


il.  2 :  "  Then  said  I,  Whither  goest  thou  ?  And  he 
said  unto  me,  To  measure  Jerusalem,"  &:c.  iii.  1,  2: 
»» And  he  shewed  me  Joshua  the  high-priest  standing 
before  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Satan  standing 
at  his  right  hand  to  resist  him.  And  the  Lord  said 
unto  Satan,  The  Lord  rebuke  thee,  O  Satan ;  even 
the  Lord  that  hath  chosen  Jerusalem,  rebuke  thee : 
is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  out  of  the  fire  ?"  As  to 
Zerubbabel,  the  prophet  says,  iv.  9,  "  The  hands  of 
Zerubbabel  have  laid  the  foundation  of  this  house  ; 
his  hands  shall  also  Jinish  it^''  &;c.  Respecting 
Semuh,  vi.  12,  13,  "Thus  speaketh  the  Lord  of 
hosts,  saying.  Behold  the  man  whose  name  is  Semuh; 
and  he  shall  grow  up  out  of  his  place,  and  ye  shall 
build  the  temple  of  the  Lord :  Even  he  shall 
build  the  temple  of  the  Lord ;  and  he  shall  bear 
the  glory,  and  shall  sit  and  rule  upon  his  throne  ;  and 
he  shall  be  a  priest  upon  his  throne :  and  the  counsel 
of  peace  shall  be  between  them  both," — that  is, 
between  Semuh  and  Joshua,  mentioned  in  the  im- 
mediately preceding  verse  11.  In  the  English  ver- 
sion the  meaning  of  the  name  of  Semuh  is  used,  viz. 
"  Branch,"  instead  of  Semuh  itself,  both  here  and  in 
ch.  iii.  8,  and  the  commentators  choose  to  apply  the 
name  thus  translated  to  Jesus,  though  no  instance 
can  be  adduced  of  Jesus  Christ's  having  been  so 
called,  and  though  the  prophet  expressly  says,  in  ch. 
vi.  12,  "  whose  name  is  Semuh."  He  is  speaking 
of  the  SECOND  building  of  the  temple,  which  began 
in  the  reign  of  Darius,  king  of  Persia,  long  before 
the  birth  of  Christ.  Vide  the  whole  book  of 
Zechariah. 

The    second   quotation   is.  "  For   thus   saith   the 


192 

Lord  of  hosts,  After  the  glory  hath  he  sent  me  Un- 
to  the    nations    which    spoiled  you ;    for    he   that 
toucheth  you,  toucheth  the  apple  of  his  eye."  (ii.  8.) 
The  prophet  here  communicates  to  the  people  the 
words  of  God,  that  "  after  he  has  sent  me  with  his 
will,  to  the  nations  who  tyrannize  over  Israel,  that* 
he  who  touches  Israel  touches  the  apple  of  his  own 
eye."     Zechariah  very  often,  in  his  book,  introduces 
himself  as  being  sent  by  God ;  but  how  the  Editor, 
from   these   circumstances,  infers  the  separate  per- 
sonality of  the  Son,  or  his  equality  with  the  Father, 
he  will,  I   hope,   explain.     If  he    insists   upon    the 
equality  of  the    Most  High,  with   him  who  says,  in 
the  verse  in  question,  "After  the  glory  hath  he  sent 
me,"  (upon  some  ground  that  we  know  nothing  of,) 
he  would  be  sorry  to  find  at  last,  that  he   equalizes 
Zechariah,  instead  of  Jesus,  with  God.     I  will,  ac- 
cording  to  the  plan  already  adopted,  notice  the  third 
quotation,  "Awake,  O  sword,"   (xiii.  7,)  in  a  subse- 
quent chapter,  among  the  other  passages  alluded  to- 
rn the  second  chapter  of  this  work. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

On  the  Editor's  Replies  to  the  Arguments  contained  in 
Chapter  11,   of  the  Second  Appeal 

To  my  inquiry,  in  the  Second  Appeal,  "  Have  we 
not  his  (Christ's)  own  express  and  often  repeated 
avowal,  that  all  the  powers  he  manifested  were 
committed  to  him  as  the  Son,  by  the  Father  of  the 

«/  PTiT®^'^,  '^  '"  *^®  original  Hebrew,  signific!*  "that."  as  well  as  "  for.' 
^f"^  Parkhuret's  Hebrew  Lexicon. 


193 

universe  ?"  the  Editor  thus  replies  in  the  negative 
(page  588  :)  "  No  ;— that  he  was  appointed  by  the 
Father  to  act  as  mediator  between  him  and  sinners, 
we  have  already  seen ;  for  without  this  he  could 
have  been  no  mediator  between  his  Father  and  his 
offending  creatures."  Every  unbiassed  man  may 
easily  pronounce,  whether  it  is  consistent  with  any 
rational  idea  of  the  nature  of  the  Deity,  that  God 
should  be  appointed  by  God,  to  "  act  the  part  of  a 
mediator,"  by  "laying  aside  his  glory,  and  taking  on 
himself  the  form  of  a  servant;^''  and  may  discern, 
whether  it  is  not  most  foreign  to  the  notion  of  the 
immutable  God,  that  circumstances  could  produce 
such  a  change  in  the  condition  of  the  Deity,  as  that 
he  should  have  been  not  only  divested  of  his  glory 
for  more  than  thirty  years,  but  even  subjected  to 
servitude.  Are  not  tlic  ideas  of  supreme  dominion 
and  that  of  subjection,  just  as  remote  as  the  east 
from  the  west  ?  Yet  the  Editor  says,  that  while 
he  was  stripping  himself  of  his  glory,  and  taking  up- 
on himself  the  form  a  servant,  he  was  just  as  much 
Jehovah  as  before. 

The  Editor,  in  common  with  other  Trinitarians, 
conceives,  that  God  the  Son,  equally  with  God  the 
Father,  (according  to  their  mode  of  expression,)  is 
possessed  of  the  attributes  of  perfection,  such  as 
mercy,  justice,  righteousness,  truth,  &c.  yet  he  rep- 
resents them  so  differently  as  to  ascribe  to  the  Fatli- 
er  strict  justice,  or  rather  vengeance  ;  and  to  the 
Son,  unlimited  mercy  and  forgiveness,  that  is,  the 
Father,  the  first  person  of  the  Godhead,  having 
beep  in  wrath  at  the  sinful  cojiduct  of  his  offending 

25 


194 

creatures,   found   his  mercy  so  resisted    by  justice, 
that  he  could  not  forgive  them  at  all,  through  mer- 
cy, unless  he  satisfied  his  justice  by  inflicting  punish- 
ment upon  these  guilty  men ;  but  the   Son,  the  sec- 
ond  person  of  the    Godhead,   though  displeased    at 
the  sins  of  his  offending  creatures^  suffered  his  mercy 
to  overcome   justice,   and  by  offering  his   own  blood 
as  an  atonement  for  their  sins,  he  has  obtained  for 
them  pardon  without  punishment ;   and  by  means  of 
vicarious   sacrifice,   reconciled    them    to  the  Father, 
and  satisfied  his  justice  and  vengeance.     If  the  jus- 
tice of   the  Father  did  not  permit  his  pardoning  sin- 
ful  creatures,  and   reconciling   them   to    himself,   in 
compliance  with   his  mercy,  unless  a  vicarious  sacri- 
fice  was  made  to  him  for  their  sins;   how  was  the 
justice  of  the  Son  prevailed  upon  by  his  mercy,  to 
admit  their  pardon,  and  their  reconcilation  to  him- 
self,  without   any    sacrifice,    offered    to  him  as   an 
atonement  for  their  sins?     It  is  then  evident,  thaf^ 
according  to  the  system  of  Trinitarians,  the  Son  had 
a  greater  portion  of   mercy  than  the    Father,  to  op- 
pose  to  his  justice,  in  having  his  sinful  creatures  par- 
doned, without  suffering  them  to  experience  individ- 
ual punishment.     Are  these  the  doctrines  on  which 
genuine  Christianity  is  founded?  God  forbid  ! 

If  the  first  person  be  acknowledged  to  be  possess- 
ed of  mercy  equally  with  the  second,  and  that  he, 
through  his  infinite  mercy  towards  his  creatures,  sent 
the  second  to  offer  his  blood  as  an  atonement  for 
their  sins,  we  must  then  confess  that  the  mode  of 
the  operation  and  manifestation  of  mercy  by  the 
first  is  strange,  and  directly  opposite  to  that  adopted 


195 


by  the  second,  who  manifested  his  mercy  even  by 
the  sacrifice  of  life,  while  the  first  person  displayed 
his  mercy  only  at  the  death  of  the  second,  without 
subjecting  himself  to  any  humiliation  or  pain. 

In  answer  to  the  Editor's  position,  that  Jesus, 
even  as  a  mediator,  was  possessed  of  every  power 
and  perfection  that  was  inherent  in  his  divine  nature, 
I  only  beg  to  remind  him  of  a  few  sacred  passages 
among  many  of  a  similar  nature.  John  iii.  35  :  "The 
Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things 
into  his  hand."  Ch.  xvii.  22  :  "And  the  glory  which 
thou  GAVEST  me,  I  have  given  them,"  <&:c.  Ch.  v.  26  : 
"  For  as  the  Father  hath  life  in  himself,  so  hath  he 
GIVEN  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself."  Luke  i. 
32  :  "  And  the  Lord  shall  give  unto  him  the  throne 
of  his  father  David."  Matt.  ix.  8  :  "  But  when  the 
multitude  saw  it,  they  marvelled,  and  glorified  God, 
who  had  given  such  power  to  men."  Ch.  xxviii.  18: 
"  Jesus  came,  and  spake  unto  them,  saying,  ^11  power 
is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth."  On  these 
texts  I  trust  no  commentary  is  necessarv  to  enable 
any  one  to  determine,  whether  all  the  power  and 
glory  that  Jesus  enjoyed  were  given  him  by  God,  or 
were  inherent  in  his  own  nature. 

The  Editor  again  denies  Christ's  having  "  possess- 
ed a  single  power,  perfection,  or  attribute,  which 
was  not  eternally  inherent  in  his  divine  nature;" 
and  defies  me  "  to  point  out  one  attribute  or  perfec- 
tion in  the  Father,  which  from  scripture  testimony 
the  Son  has  not  been  already  shown  to  possess."  1 
therefore  take  upon  myself  to  point  out  a  few  in- 
stances which.  I  hope,  w^ill  convince  the  Editor  that 


the  peculiar  attributes  of  God   were  never  ascribed 
to  Jesus,  nor   to  any  other   human  being  who  may 
have  been,  hke  Jesus,  figuratively  call  gods  in  scrip, 
tural  language.     In  the  first  place,  the  attribute  of 
being  the  "Most  High"  or   fV^IT,  by  which  the  su- 
preme  Deity  is  distinguished  above   all  gods,   is  not 
found  once  ascribed  to  Jesus,  though   invariably  ap- 
plied to   the  Father  throughout  the  scriptural  writ- 
ings.    2dly.     Jesus  was  never   called   almighty,    or 
nC^^   a   term    peculiarly  used  for  the  Deity.    Nay, 
moreover,  he  expressly  denies  being  possessed  of  al- 
mighty power.  Matt.  xx.  23  :  ''  But  to  sit  on  my  right 
hand,  and  on  my  left,  is  not  mine  to  give,  but  to  them 
for  whom  it   is  prepared  of  my  Father."     Ch.  xxvi. 
53 :  "  Thinkest   thou  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  mv 
Father,  and  he   shall  presently  give  me  more   than 
twelve  legions  of  angels?"     John  xi.   41:    "Then 
they  took  away  the  stone  from  the  place  where  the 
dead  was  laid ;  and  Jesus  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  said, 
Father,  1   thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard  vie.''     He 
also  denies  his  omniscience,  Mark  xiii.   32 :  "  But   of 
that  day  and  that  hour  knoweth  no  man;  no,  not  the 
angels  which  are  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the 
Father."     Any  being  if  not  supreme,  almighty,   and 
omniscient,  and,   more   especially,  one  subjected  to 
the  transitions  of  birth   and  death,  must,   however 
highly  exalted,  even  by  the  title  of  a  god,  and  though 
for  ages  endowed  with  all   power  in  heaven  and  in 
earth,  be  considered   a  created    being,  and,  like  all 
creatures,  be  in  the  end,  as  the  apostle  declares,  sub- 
ject to  the  Creator  of  all    things.    Besides,   in   the 
creed  which  the  generality  of  Trinitarians   profess. 


197 


God  is  described  as  self-existent,  having  proceeded 
from  none  ;  but  the  Son,  on  the  contrary,  is  repre- 
sented as  proceeding  from  the  Father.  Here  even 
the  orthodox  amongst  Christians  ascribe  the  attribute 
of  self-existence  to  the  Father  of  the  universe  alone. 
In  my  Second  Appeal  1  observed,  that  "the  sun, 
although  he  is  the  most  powerful  and  most  splendid 
of  all  known  created  beings,  has  yet  no  claim  to  be 
considered  identical  in  nature  with  God,  who  has  given 
to  the  sun  all  the  heat,"  &:c.;  to  which  the  Editor 
replies,  "  What  is  the  sun  to  his  Maker  ?" — 1  wish 
he  had  also  added,  "  but  that  which  a  son  and  crea- 
ture is  to  his  Father  and  Creator?  "  When  he  again 
inquires,  saying,  "  If  the  sun  has  no  claim  to  Godhead, 
has  it's  Maker  none  ?"  (alluding  to  Christ,)  he  might 
have  recollected  that  neither  the  sun  nor  Jesus  has 
ever  arrogated  to  himself  godhead,  but  that  it  is 
their  worshippers  that  have  advanced  doctrines  as- 
cribing godhead  and  infinite  perfection  to  these  finite 
objects.  Notwithstanding  that  we  daily  witness  the 
power  of  the  glorious  sun  in  bringing  into  life,  and 
preserving  to  maturity,  an  infinite  variety  of  vegeta- 
ble and  animal  objects,  yet  our  gratitude  and  admira- 
tion recognise  in  him  only  a  being  instrumental  in  the 
hands  of  God,  and  we  offer  worship  and  duty  to  him 
alone,  who  has  given  to  the  sun  all  the  light  and 
animating  warmth  which  he  sheds  on  our  globe.  On 
the  same  ground,  whether  we  understand  from  scrip- 
tural authority,  that  the  supreme  Deity  made  through 
Jesus  Christ  all  the  things  belonging  to  the  Christian 
dispensation,  or  every  thing  relating  to  this  visible 
worUf*  (as  interpreted  by  the  worshippers  of  Jesus,) 


I 


198 

we  must  not,  in  either  case,  esteem  him  as  the  su- 
preme Deity,  in  whose  hand  he  is  represented  by 
the  same  scriptures  but  as  an  instrument. 

The  Editor  says,   that  though   the    power  of  ef- 
fecting a  material  change,   without  the  aid  of  pljysi- 
cal  means,  be  pccuh'ar  to  God,  "  yet  this  power  Christ 
not  only  possessed,  but    bestowed   on  his  aposUes." 
Supposing  Jesus  alone  had  the   power  of  effecting 
material  changes  without  the  aid  of  physical  means, 
and  of  bestowing  on  others  the   same  gift,  it   could 
tave  proved  only  his  being  singular  in  the  enjoyment 
of  this  peculiar   blessing  of  God,  and  not  his  being 
identical  or  equal   with  Him  who  conferred  such  a 
power  on  him ;  but  it  is  notorious  that  Jesus  was  not 
at  all  peculiar  in  this  point.      Were  not  the  miracles 
performed   by  Joshua  and   Elijah,  as  wonderful   as 
those  done  by  Jesus  ?  Did  not  Elijah  bestow  on  his 
servant  Elisha  the  power  of  effecting  changes  without 
physical  means,  by  putting  his  own  spirit  on  him  ?  Is 
Elijah,  from  the  possession  of  this  power,  to  be  con- 
sidered an  incarnation  of  the  supreme  Deity  ?  2  Kings 
11.  9—12:  "  And  it  came  to  pass   when  they  (Elijah, 
and  Elisha)  were  gone  over,  that  Elijah  said  unto 
Ehsha,  Jsk  what  I  shall  do  for  thee  before  I  be  tak- 
en  away  from  thee.     And   Elisha  said,  I  pray  thee, 
let  a  double  portion  of  thy  spirit  be  upon  me.     And 
he  said.  Thou  hast  asked  a  hard  thing,  nevertheless 
if  thou  see  me  when  I  am  taken  from  thee,  //  shall  be  so 
unto  thee;  but  if  not,  it  shall  not  be  so.— And  Elijah 
was  taken  up  by  a   whirlwind  into   heaven.      And 
Elisha  saw  it,  and  he   cried.  My  father,  my  father," 
&c.    Vers.  14,  15  :  "And  when  he  had  smitten  the 


i 


I 


199 

waters,  they  parted  hither  and  thither,  and   Elisha 
went  over.     When  the  sons  of  the  prophets  saw 
him,  they  said.  The  spirit  of  Elijah  doth  rest  on  Eli- 
sha.     And  they  came  to  meet  him,  and  bowed  them- 
selves to  the  ground  before  him."     Besides,  we  find 
in  the  evangelical  writings,  that  notwithstanding  the 
power  of  performing  miracles  given  by  Jesus  to  his 
apostles,  they  could  not  avail  themselves  of  such  a 
gift,  until  their  faith  in  God  was  become  firm  and 
complete  :  it  is  thence  evident  that  God  is   the  only 
source  of  the  power  and  influence  that  one  creature 
has  over  another.     Matt.  x.  1 :  "And  when  he  had 
called   unto  him   his  twelve  disciples,  he  gave  them 
power  against  unclean  spirits,  to  cast  them  out,  and 
to  heal  all  manner  of  sickness,  and  all  manner  of  dis- 
ease."     Ch.  xvii.  16:  "  And  1  brought  him  (the  lu- 
natic child)  to  thy  disciples,  and  they  could  not  cure 
him."     Vers.  19—21  :  "  Then  came  the  disciples  to 
Jesus  apart,  and  said.  Why  could  not  we  cast  him 
out  ?  And  Jesus  said  unto   them,  Because  of  your 
unbelief;  for  verily  i  say  unto  you,  if  ye  have  faith 
as  a  grain  of  mustard-seed,  ye   shall   say  unto  this 
mountain,  Remove  hence  to  another  place,   and  it 
shall  remove,  and  nothing  shall    be  impossible  unto 
you.     Howbeit  this  kind  goeth  not  oat  but  by  pray- 
er and  fasting."     Mark  xi.  22  :    "  And  Jesus  answer- 
ingsaith  unto  them,  (his  disciples,)  Have  faith  in  God; 
for  verily  1  say  unto  you,   that  whosoever  shall  say 
unto  this  mountain.  Be  thou  removed,"  &c. 

In  my  Second  Appeal  1  mentioned,  that  it  is  evi- 
dent from  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  thjjt  "  in  the 
beginning  of  the  creation,  God  bestowed  on  man  his 


r 


A^ 


! 


¥■ 


i 


200 

likeness,  and  sovereignty  over  all  living  creatures. 
Was  not  his  own  likeness,  and  that  dominion,  pecu- 
har  to  God,  before  mankind  were  made  partakers  of 
them  ?  Did  God  then  deify  man  by  such  a  mark  of 
distinction  ?'  On   which  the  Editor  thus   remarks : 
«  It  is  m  reality  asking,  Did  God  make  him  cease  to 
be  a  creature  by  thus  creating  him  ?  We  presume  he 
expects  no  answer."     If  the    Editor  acknowledges 
that  God,  by  bestowing  on  man  his  peculiar  likeness 
and  dominion,  did  not  make  him  cease  to  be  a  crea- 
ture, is  he  not,  according  to  the  same  principle,  oblig- 
ed to  admit  the  opinion,  that  although   God  raised 
Jesus  above  all,  and  bestowed  on  him  a  portion  of 
his  peculiar  power  and  influence,  yet  he  did  not  make 
him  cease  to  be  a  creature  "? 

In  my  Second  Appeal,  (pages  1.57,  158,)  I  select- 
ed nineteen  passages  out  of  many.   In  which  Jesus 
distinctly  disavows  the  divine  nature,  and  manifests 
his  subordination  to  God ;  to   which   the  Editor  re- 
plies, «  They  can  prove  nothing  to  his  purpose,  till 
»hey  shew  that  his  thus  becoming  incarnate,  changed 
that  divine  nature  which  he  possessed  from  eternity,"' 
&c.     I  therefore  take  upon  myself  to  ask  the  Rev. 
Editor,  whether  the  following  passages  found  among 
those  already  quoted,  do  not  prove  the   entire   hu*'- 
manity  of  the  Son,  or  (in  the  words  of  the  Editor)  a 
complete  change  in  his  divine  nature,  if  he  was  ever 
possessed  of  it  ?    «  As  the  Father  gave  me  command- 
ment, even  so  I  do^^      «  I  can  of  mine  ownself  do 
NOTHING.-'     « All    that    the    Father  giveth   me   shall 
'■ome  to  me."     «  As  my  Father  hath  taught  m.,  I  speak 
«hese  things."     «  To  my  Father  and  vour  Father,  ami 


I 

I 


201 

to  my  God  and  your   God."     "  Behold  my  servant 
whom  1  have  chosen."     If  these  declarations  do  fall 
short  of  shewing  the  human  nature  of  the   person 
who  affirms  them,  I,  as  well  as  the  Editor,  should 
be  at  a  loss  to  point  out  any  saying  of  any  of  the 
preceding  prophets,  that  might  tend  to  substantiate 
their  humanity.     The  Editor  may  perhaps  say,  after 
the  example  of  his  orthodox  friends,  that  these,  as 
well  as  other  sayings  to  the  same  effect,  proceeded 
from  Jesus  in  his  human  capacity.     I  shall  then  en- 
treat the  Editor  to  shew  me  any  authority  in  the 
scriptures,  distinguishing  one  class'  of  the   sayings  of 
Jesus  Christ,  as  man,  from  another  set  of  the  same 
author  as  God.     Supposing  Jesus  was  of  a  two-fold 
nature,  divine  and  human,  as  the  Editor  believes  him 
to  be;  his  divine  nature  in  this  case,  before  his  ap- 
pearance in  this  world,  must   be  acknowledged  per- 
fectly  pure  and  unadulterated   by  humanity.     But 
after  he  had  become  incarnate,  according  to  the  Ed- 
itor, was  he  not  made  of  a  mixed  nature^of  God  and 
man,  possessing  at  one  time   both  opposite  sorts  of 
consciousness    and   capacity?       Was    there    not    a 
CHANGE  of  a  pure  nature  into  a  mixed  one  ?     I  will 
not,  however,  pursue  the  subject  further  now,  as  I 
have  already  fully  noticed  it  in  another  place  (pa^cs 
1 13  and  1 15.)     The  Editor  adverts  here  to  Heb"  i 
10,  1  Cor.  XV.   24,  25 ;  but  as  I  have  examined  tho 
tormcr  in    page    101    and  the  latter  in  page   104,  J 
will  not  revert  to  the  consideration  of  them  in  this 
place. 

At  page  589,  the  Editor  thus  censure^  me  :    "  To 
say  that  in  the  mouth  of  the  Father,  '  forever  and 

26 


I 


f" 

I. 


4 

H 


\ 


It 


•     ; 


o 


202 

ever'  means  only  a  limited  period,  is  to  destroy  the 
eternity  of  God  himself;"  and  he  quotes,  "  Jehovah 
shall  reign  forever  and  ever."      I  have  shown  by  nu- 
merous instances,  both  in  my  Second  and  in  the  pres- 
ent Appeal,  that  the  terms  " forever,"  "everlasting," 
when  applied  to  any  one  except  God,,  signify  long  du- 
ration:   I  therefore    presume  to  think  that  the  Edi- 
tor might    have   spared  this  censure   as  being  alto- 
gether undeserved.      I  will  here,  however,  point  out 
one  or  two  more  passages  in  the  mouth  of  the  Fath- 
er, which  contain  the  term  "forever,"  and  in  which 
it  can  imply  only  long  duration.     Gen.  xvii.  8  :  "  And 
I  will  give  unto  thee,  and  unto  thy  seed  after  thee 
— all  the    land  of  Canaan,  for    an  everlasting  posses- 
sion."    Jer.  vii.  7  :  "  Then  will  1  cause  you  to  dwell 
in   this  place,  in  the  land  that  I  gave  to  your  fathers 
forever  and  ercr."      Dan.  vii.    18:  "But  the  saints  of 
the  Most  High  shall  take  the  kingdom  forever,  even 
forever  and  ever."     Is  the   land  of  Canaan  now  in 
possession  of  Israel ;  and  will  it  remain  in  their  pos- 
session  after    all   rule,   authority,   and    power    have 
been  put  down,  and  after  the  Son  has  delivered  up 
his  kingdom  to  God  the  Father  of   the  universe  ?  1 
Cor.  XV.  24,  28. 

The  Editor  in  the  course  of  this  discussion  notices 
Philip,  ii.  6,  whence  he  concludes  that  Jesus  was  in 
the  form  of  God,  and  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be 
equal  with  God,  yet  took  upon  himself  the  form  of 
a  servant,  and  became  obedient  to  death  ;  I  will, 
therefore,  first  give  the  verse  as  it  stands  in  the  En- 
glish version,  and  for  the  purpose  of  shewing  the 
sjradual   progress   of   truth,  I  will  add  some  subse- 


203 

quent  translation  of  the  same  verse,  by  eminently 
learned  Trinitarian  authors,  and  finally  transcribe  it 
as  found  in  the  original  Greek,  with  a  verbal  trans- 
lation. 

English  version.  Philip,  ii.  6 :  "  Who,  being  in 
the  form  of  God,  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal 
with  God." 

Secondly.     In  a  new  translation  from  the  original 
Greek,  by   James   Macknight,  D.    D.   verse    G    thus 
stands  :  "  Who  being   in  the  form  of  God,  did   not 
think  it   robbery   to  be   like  God."     So  John  Park- 
hurst,  M.  A,  the    author  of  a  Greek   and   English 
Lexicon    to  the  New   Testament,  who  was   also  an 
orthodox  writer,  thus  translates,  conformably  to  the 
opinion  of  Drs.  Doddridge  and  Whitby,  two  other  cel- 
ebrated orthodox  writers,  page  322 :  "  Philipp.   W.  6, 
10  anat  i6a  heio^    to    be   as   God.      So    f<^cc   &eio  jg   most 
exactly  rendered,   agreeably  to   the   force  of  k^cc   jn 
many  places  in  the  LXX.  which  Whitby  has  collected 
m  his  note  on  this  place.     The  proper  Greek  phrase 
for  equal  to  God   is  idov  zw  fe^^w,  which  is  used  John 
V.  18:"  'Therefore  the   Jews  sought   the    more  to 
kill  him,  because  he  not  only   had   broken   the  sab- 
bath, but  said  also  that  God  was  his  Father,  making 
himself  equal  with  God.'  "     (This  is  not  the  only  in- 
stance  that  [in    which]  the    Jews    misunderstood'  Je- 
sus, for  in  many  otiier  instances  they  misconceived 
his^  meaning.    John  ii.  19,  21  ;   vi.  41,  42,  52,  60.) 

The  term,  "  to  be  like  God,"  as  it  is  used  by  sev- 
eral orthodox  writers,  neither  amounts  to  an  identi- 
ty of  one  with  the  other,  nor  does  it  prove  an 
equality  of  the  former  with  the  latter.     Gen.  i.  26  : 


\ 


^t• 


/ 


/ 


•204 

-God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image,  and  after 
our  likeness:'  1  Chron.  xii.  22:  "  At  that  time,  day 
by  day,  there  came  to  David  to  help  him,  until  it 
was  a  great  host,  like  tlie  host  of  God."  Ch.  xxvii. 
23  :  "  The  Lord  had  said  that  he  would  increase 
Israel  like  to  the  stars  of  heaven."  Zech.  xii.  8 : 
"In  that  day  shall  the  Lord  defend  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem,  and  he  that  is  feeble  among  them  at 
that  day  shall  be  as  David :  and  the  house  of  David 
shall  be  as  God,  as  the  angel  of  the  Lord  before 
them."  1  John  iii.  2 :  "  But  we  know  that  when  he 
shall  appear,  we  shall  be  like  him,''  &c. 

Another  Trinitarian  author,  Sclileusner,  in  his 
Lexicon  to  the  New  Testament,  renders  the  passage 
"  non  habuit  pra^da)  loco  similitudinem  cum  Deo," 
"  He  did  not  esteem  likeness  to  God  in  the  place  of 
a  prey."  The  substance  of  this  translation  is  adopt- 
ed in  the  Improved  Version  of  the  New  Testament. 

1     2     3 
3dly.     The  original  Greek  runs  thus  :    O^  tv  fiog^pri 
4  5         6  7  8  9    10    11     12 

Stov    vjiagxiov^   ovx    ccgjia/uov   r;yr^6azo  io  htuc  lOu   6eu). 

12       3         4  5  6  7  8 

"  Who  in  form  of  God  being,  not  robbery  thought 

9       10      11      12 
the  being  like  God."     Which  words,  arranged  ac- 
cording to  the  English  idiom,  will  run  thus  :  "  Who 
being  in  the  form  of  God,  did  not  tliink  of*  the  rob- 
bery  the  being  like  God."     This   interpretation  is 

*  We  find  the  verb  r?yeo/iot  implying  to  esteem  as  well  as  to  think,  with 
a  simple  accusative,  [2]  Peter  iii.  9  :  wj  t«v€$  PpaSv-rvTa  riyowTaty  '♦  as  s^ome 
men  count  slackness"  (properly  speaking,  "  think  of  slackness." ) 


205 

most  decisively  confirmed  by  the  context  of  the  verse 
in  question.  Verse  3  of  the  same  chapter:  "Let 
nothing  be  done  through  strife  or  vain  glory ;  but,  in 
lowliness  of  mind,  let  each  esteem  other  better  than 
themselves."  Ver.  4 :  "  Look  not  every  man  on  his 
own  things,  but  every  man  also  on  the  things  of  oth- 
ers." Ver.  5:  "Let  this  mind  he  in  you  which  was 
also  in  Christ  Jesus,"  Ver.  6 :  "  Who,  being  in  the 
form  of  God,  did  not  think  of  the  robbery  of  being 
like  God."  Ver.  7.  "  But  made  himself  of  no  repu- 
tation, and  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant,  and 
was  made  in  the  likeness  of  men."  Where  the  sense 
of  a  passage  is  complete  without  introducing  an  addi- 
tional word  more  than  is  expressed,  no  one,  unless  de- 
voted to  the  support  of  some  particular  doctrine, 
would  think  of  violating  fidelity  to  the  original  text 
by  interpolation  in  the  translation.  Here  the  apostle 
requires  of  us  to  esteem  others  better  than  ourselves, 
according  to  the  example  of  humility  displayed  by 
Jesus,  who,  notwithstanding  his  godly  appearance, 
never  thought  of  those  perfections  by  which  he  ap- 
proached man's  ideas  of  God,  but  even  made  him- 
self of  no  reputation.  It  would  be  absurd  to  point 
out  one's  own  opinion  of  his  equality  with  God  as  an 
instance  of  humility.  How  can  we  be  following  the 
example  of  Christ,  in  thinking  others  better  than  our- 
selves, if  he,  as  the  orthodox  say,  did  not  think  even 
his  Father  higher  than  himself  ?  We,  however,  must 
not  suffer  ourselves  to  be  misled  by  any  such  ortho- 
dox interpretation,  to  entertain  so  erroneous  an  idea 
of  Christ's  opinion  of  himself,  bearing  in  mind  that 
Jesus  himself  proclaims,  "My  Father  is  greater 
than  I."     John  xiv.  28. 


i 


\    4 


1 
* 


u 


t  ^ 


V, 

ir 


/ 


206 


No  one  can  be  at  a  loss  to  understand  the  ditier- 
ence  of  essence  between  Christ  and  his  creator  God, 
imphed  in  the  phrase, — "  Being  in  tlie  form  of  God  ;" 
as  the  distinction  between  "  being  God,"  and  "  being 
in  the  form  of  God,"  is  too  obvious  to  need  illustra- 
tion. Even  Parkhurst,  one  of  the  most  zealous  ad- 
vocates for  the  Trinity,  thought  it  absurd  to  lay 
stress  on  the  term  "  being  in  the  form  of  God,"  in 
support  of  the  deity  of  Jesus  Christ.  (See  page 
443.)  *''- Mog(p7i^  perhaps  from  the  Hebrew  HN^IO 
appearance^  and  HD  aspect.  Outward  appearance, 
form,  which  last  word  is  from  the  Latin  for- 
ma^ and  this,  by  transposition,  from  the  Doric 
fiogq)a  for  t^og(pri.  See  Mark  xvi.  12,  (comp.  Luke 
xxiv.  13,)  Philipp.  ii.  6,  7,  where  the  6th  verse 
refers  not,  \  apprehend,  to  Christ's  being  real  and 
essential  God,  or  essential  Jehovah,  (though  that  he 
is  so  is  the  foundation  of  Christianity,)  but  to  his  glo- 
rious appearance  as  God  before  and  under  the  Mo- 
saic dispensation." 

Should  any  one,  in  defiance  of  the  common  accep- 
tation of  the  word  "  form,"  and  of  every  authority, 
insist  upon  its  implying  real  essence  in  the  phrase, 
'*  beins:  in  the  form  of  God,"  he  must  receive  it  in 
the  same  sense  in  the  following  verse,  "  took  upon 
himself  the  form  of  a  servant ;"  and  he  must  then 
admit  and  believe  that  Christ  was  possessed  of  the 
real  essence  of  God  and  the  real  essence  of  a  servant. 
How  can  we  reconcile  real  Godhead  with  real  ser- 
vitude, even  for  a  moment  ? 

Nor  can  the  phrase,  "  Was  made  in  the  likeness  of 
man"  in  verse  7,  be  admitted   to   identify  him   with 


,1 


207 


Jehovah,  any  more  than  we  can  allow  that  Samson 
is  so  identified  by  the  use  of  the  parallel  expression 
in  Judges  xvi.  7  and  17  :  "1  shall  be  weak,  and  be 
as  a  man,"  "  And  be  like  any  man."  In  the  English 
version,  the  word  other  is  found  ;  that  is,  "  be  like 
another  man ;"  which  is  not  warranted  by  the  origi- 
nal Hebrew,  as  Mr.  Brown,  an  orthodox  commenta- 
tor, justly  remarks  in  the  margin. 

The    Editor    says,    (page    590,)    "  Relative    to 
Christ's    being   the  first-born  of  every  creature,   we 
reply  with  Dr.    Owen,    whose   work   on  Socinianism 
has  never  been  answered, — '  It  is  not  said   Christ  is 
jigbizo7izt6xoi^   first-created^    but    ^pwzozoxos,    the  first- 
horn  ;  and   Christ   is  so  the    first-born,   as  to  be  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God,   is  so  the  first  of  every 
creature,  that  is,  he  is  before  them  all,  above   them 
all,  heir  to  them  all,  and  so  no  one  of  them.' "     Al- 
though both  "  first-created,"  and  "  first-born,"  from 
the  common  acceptation  of  these  words,  equally  im- 
ply a  created  nature,  yet  the   reason  for  St.  Paul's 
choice  of  the  word  "  first-born"  is  obvious  ;  for  when 
used  in  reference  to  a  creation  not  produced  in  the 
natural  course,  first-born  signifies  superiority  toother 
creatures  of  the  same  class,  and  not  "an  only-begot- 
ten son,"  as  Dr.  Owen  and  the  Editor  seem  to  sup- 
pose.     I  will  here  point  out  the  sense   in  which  the 
word  "  first-born"  is  used  in  the  scriptures  when  ob- 
viously not    relating  to  natural  birth.      Exod.  iv.  22, 
we  find  in  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  himself,  Israel  de- 
signated by  the  terms,  "  my  son,  even  my  first-born.^^ 
Again,   Jer.  xxxi.  9 :   "  I  am  a  Father  to  Israel,  and 
Ephraim   is   viy  first-horn!'''     Psalm   Ixxxix.   27:    "I 


?*  J 


r 

J     4r' 

1 

* 


i 


V, 


■I- 


■  f 


',   Y 


2oa 

v-«7f  um\^e  him  (David)  my  fir sUhorn^  higher  than  the 
kings  of  the  earths  And  now  I  will  take  upon  my- 
self to  ask  the  Editor,  whether  Israel,  as  well  as 
David,  was  so  "  first-born"  as  "  to  be  the  only-begot- 
ten son  of  God,"  and  was  also  "  before  all  the  crea- 
tures, above  them  all,  heir  to  them  all,  and  so  no  one 
of  them;"  or  whether  that  designation  was  not 
rather  applied  both  to  the  nation  and  to  the  individ- 
ual because  they  were  principal  persons,  and  to 
shew  that  they  were  respectively  chosen  of  God 
above  the  rest  of  his  creation  ?  Rom.  viii.  29:  "For 
whom  God  did  foreknow,  he  also  did  predestinate 
to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he 
mio-ht  be  the  first-born  among  many  brethren." 
St.  John  defines  what  would  be  understood  by  the 
term  "  to  be  born  of  God^  Vide  1  John  iv.  7  : 
"  Beloved,  let  us  love  one  another :  for  love  is  of 
God,  and  every  one  that  loveth  is  born  of  God^  and 
knoweth  God."  Hence  Jesus  is  considered  and  de- 
clared to  be  the  head  of  the  children  of  God.  So 
the  term  "  only-begotten  son"  signifies  most  beloved 
among  children,  whether  natural  or  spiritual,  and  not 
an  only  son  of  a  father ;  as  we  find,  in  Heb.  xi.  17, 
this  very  term  applied  to  Isaac,  though  Abraham 
had  another  son  by  Hagar. 

As  to  his  assertion,  "  Christ  is  no  one  of  them," 
(that  is,  of  creatures,)  I  only  quote  a  few  passages, 
in  which  Jesus  himself  and  his  apostles  enumerated 
him  as  "  one  of  them."  Matt.  xxv.  40 :  "  Verily,  I 
say  unto  you,  inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  unto  one 
of  the  least  of  these  my  brethren^  ye  have  done  it 
unto  me."     Here   it    is    the   King  and  Lord,   ^xiUng 


if"i 


209 


upon  the  throne  of  his  glory  at  the  last  day,  who  is 
represented  as  styling  the  poor  and  helpless  his 
brethren.  Ch.  xxviii.  10:  "Then  said  Jesus  unto 
them.  Be  not  afraid.  Go  and  tell  my  brethren  that 
they  go  into  Galilee ;  and  there  shall  they  see  me." 
John  XX.  17  :  "  But  go  to  my  brethren,  and  say  unto 
them,  I  ascend  to  my  Father  and  to  your  Father, 
and  to  my  God  and  your  God."  1  Cor.  ix.  5  :  "As 
the  brethren  of  the  Lord  and  Cephas."  Heb.  ii.  11 : 
"  For  he  that  sanctifieth,  and  they  that  are  sanctifi- 
ed, are  all  of  one  (Father) ;  for  which  cause  he  is 
not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethren,'''*  Ver.  12  :  "  Say- 
ing, [  will  declare  thy  name  unto  my  brethren.  In 
the  midst  of  the  church  will  I  sing  praise  unto  thee." 
As  to  the  Editor's  reliance  on  the  subsequent 
verses,  to  shew  that  the  creation  of  all  things  was 
effected  by  Christ,  I  refer  my  readers  to  page  91 
of  this  Essay,  where  I  observe  that  the  apostle  Paul 
means,  in  these  passages,  only  the  creation  of  all 
the  things  in  the  Christian  dispensation,  as  is  explain- 
ed in  Eph.  i.  21,  22,  which  represent  Jesus  as  head 
over  all  things  belonging  to  the  church.  I  need  not 
renew  the  subject  of  Revelations,  repeated  by  the 
Editor,  as  I  have  already  examined  it  in  pages  162, 
181. 

1  have  shewn,  in  pages  156,  157,  158,  that  whatev- 
er power  Jesus  possessed  either  as  man.  Son  of  man, 
God,  or  Son  of  God,  he  received  the  same  from  the 
Father  of  the  universe  ;  therefore  the  assertion  of 
the  Editor,  that  ("certain  powers  were  conferred 
on  Jesus,  not  as  a  man,  but  as  the  Messiah,  Christ, 
the  anointed  Son  of  God")  is,  I  presume,  one  of  the 

27 


! 


\¥ 


i|i 


I 


v 


♦•     !/ 


\ 


\ 


210 

nijsteries  of  the  doctrine  of  [the]  Trinity.  How 
can  the  Editor  reconcile  the  passages,  quoted  in  my 
Second  Appeal,  to  this  assertion?  Let  him  answer 
what  is  there  advanced,  in  the  course  of  the  discus- 
sion of  this  very  subject,  of  a  few  points  of  which  I 
beg  to  remind  him. 

Lt.  "  In  John  xvii.  r»,  '  And  now,  O  Father,  glo- 
rify me  with  thine  own  self,  witli  the  glory  which  I 
had  with  thee  before  the  world  was,'  with  the  san:e 
breath  with  which  he  prays  for  glory,  he  identifies 
the  nature  in  which  he  does  so,  with  that  under 
which  he  lived  with  God  before  the  creation  of  the 
world."  Is  not  this  petition  to  God  for  glory,  by  the 
same  person,  wlio  says  he  was  with  God  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world?  Was  he,  before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world,  a  man,  or  of  a  two-fold  nature, 
human  and  divine  ?  If  he  was  God  almighty  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  how  could  that  God 
implore  another  being  for  the  restoration  of  the 
glory,  which  he  at  one  time  had,  but  lost  subse- 
quently? 

2dly.  In  John  viii.  42,  Jesus  declare?,  that  he 
came  not  of  himself,  but  that  God  sent  him.  Does 
not  he  avow  here,  that  his  coming  to  this  world  was 
not  owing  to  his  own  will,  but  to  the  will  of  another 
being?  Was  he  not  entirely  at  the  disposal  of  God, 
the  Most  High,  even  before  his  coming  into  this 
world?  In  Heb.  x.  5—7,  the  apostle  declares,  that 
Jesus,  at  the  time  of  his  coming  to  the  world,  saith, 
that  God  had  prepared  him  a  body,  and  that  he 
comes  to  the  world  to  do  the  will  if  Clod.  Had  he 
been  God  before  he  had  come  to  this  world,  how 


I  m^ 


211 

could  he,  in  common  with  all  other  creatures,  at- 
tribute his  own  actions  to  the  will  of  the  Supreme 
Disposer  of  all  the  events  of  the  universe? 

The  Editor  next  quotes  a  part  of  Heb.  i.  12, 
«Thou  art  the  same."  This  I  have  fully  noticed  in 
page  102. 

Tiie  Editor  disapproves  highly  of  my  assertion,  in 
the  Second  Appeal,  "Christ  was  vested  with  glory 
from  the  be^jinninor  of  the  world."  I  therefore  beg 
to  quote  one  or  two  scriptural  passages,  which,  I 
hope,  will  justify  that  assertion.  1  John  ii.  13  :  "I 
write  unto  you,  fathers,  because  ye  have  known  him 
that  is  from  the  beginning."  Rev.  iii.  14  :  "  These 
things  saith  the  Amen,  the  beginning  of  the  creation 
of  God." 

The  Editor  insinuates,  that  I  have  contradicted 
myself  by  "  ridiculing  the  idea  of  Christ's  having  two 
natures,"  after  I  had  declared  that  Christ  "  lived 
with  God  before  the  creation  of  the  world,"  and 
that  "  it  would  have  been  idle  to  have  informed 
them,  (the  Jews,)  that,  in  his  mere  corporeal  nature, 
Jesus  was  inferior  to  his  Maker,  and  it  must,  there- 
fore, have  been  his  spiritual  nature,  of  which  he 
here  avowed  his  inferiority  to  God."  I  cannot  per- 
ceive what  contradiction  there  is  in  the  assertion, 
that  Christ  lived  in  the  divine  purpose   and  decree 


# 


*  On  John  xvii.  5.  He  had  it  (the  same  glory)  with  the  Father  before 
tlie  world  was,  that  is,  in  the  Father's  purpose  and  decree.  In  the  lancruage 
of  scripture,  what  God  determines  to  bring  to  p;iss,  is  represented  as  actually 
accomplisliod  i  thus,  the  dead  are  represented  as  living,  Luke  xx.  36 — 38. 
Believers  aie  spoken  of  as  already  glorified,  Rom.  viii.  29,  30.  Things  that 
are  not,  are  called  as  though  tli«y  were,  Rom.  iv.  17.  And  in  verse  12  of 
this  chapter,  .Tudas  is  said  to  be  destroyed,  though  he  was  then  living,  and 
actually  bargaining  with  the  priests  and  rulers  to  betray  his  Master.  See  al- 
so verse  10  ;  Eph.  i.  4  ;  2  Tim.  i.  9  ;  Rev.  xiii.  8  :  Heb.  x.  34.  (Improved 
Version.) 


4 


i; 


-.•  ?• 


7 


■'        -v 


212 

before  the  world  was,  and  that  he,  not  merely  as  a 
man,  before  the  assuming  of  the  oiFice  of  the  Mes- 
siah, was  inferior  to  his  Creator,  but  that  he  was  so 
even  after  he  had  been  endowed  with  the  Holv 
Spirit  in  the  river  of  Jordan,  and  with  the  power  of 
performing  miracles,  which  is  said  to  be  a  spiritual 
gift. — Supposing  he,  like  Adam,  lived  with  God  be- 
fore his  coming  into  this  world,  (accordmg  to  the 
doctrines  maintained  by  some  Christians,)  and  after- 
wards was  sent  to  the  world,  in  the  body  of  Jesus, 
for  effecting  human  salvation,  as  John  the  Baptist 
was  esteemed  to  be  Elijah,  even  this  doctrine  does 
not  preclude  us  from  rejecting  the  idea  of  a  two-fold 
nature  of  God  and  man. 

The  Editor  says,  that  when  "he  (Jesus)  emptied 
himself  of  his  glory,  did  he  lay  aside  his  divine  na- 
ture, of  which  his  glory  was  merely  a  shadow?"  and 
then  he  recommends  me  to  reflect,  for  a  moment, 
on  what  the  term  glory  implies;  "understood  eithev 
of  praise  or  grandeur,  it  is  merely  the  reflection  or 
indication  of  a  glorious  nature."  I  have  reflected, 
for  some  years  past,  and  do  now  seriously  reflect,  on 
the  divine  nature,  but  1  find  it  inconsistent  with  any 
idea  I  can  admit  of  the  eternal  and  unchangeable  Al- 
mighty, that  he  should  empty  himself  of  his  glory, 
(call  it  praise  or  grandeur,  which  you  like,)  though 
for  a  season,  and  should  afterwards  offer  supplica- 
tions for  the  same  glory  to  himself,  as  if  another  be- 
ing; addressing  that  other  self  as  his  own  father; 
since  God  is  often  declared  to  have  hardened  the 
heart  of  men  so  [as]  to  disqualify  them  from  per- 
ceiving his  glory,  instead  of  having  degraded  himself 


213 


bv  settmg  aside  his  own  title   to  praise,  or   the  gran- 
deur which  is  inherent  in  his  nature. 

The  Editor  adds,  "  If  it  was  deserved  glory,  it  was 
that  of  wfiich  his  nature  was  worthy,  and  the  Fath- 
er's giving  it  to  him,  when  no  being  existed  beside 
the  sacred  three,  was  the  Father's  attestation  to  the 
Son's  eternal  Godhead."  If  the  Father's  giving  to 
Jesus  deserved  glory,  should  be  acknowledged  as 
amounting  "  to  his  attestation  to  the  Son's  Godhead," 
we  must  be  under  the  necessity  of  admitting  the  at- 
testation of  Jesus  to  the  eternal  deity  of  his  apos- 
tles, from  the  circumstance  of  his  having  given  them 
the  same  deserved  glory; — John  xvii.  22,  "  And  the 
glory  which  thou  hast  given  me  I  have  given  them," 
&c. 

The  Editor  twice  says,  that  "  Micah  informs  us 
that  the  Son  is  from  everlasting.^'  I  wish  he  had 
mentioned  the  chapter  and  verse  to  which  he  al- 
ludes, that  I  might  have  examined  the  passage. 

He  perhaps  alludes  to  the  phrase  "everlasting," 
found  in  the  English  version,  in  Micah  v.  2,  "  Out  of 
thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be  ruler 
in  Israel,  whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of  old, 
from  everlasting."  I  will,  therefore,  quote  Park- 
hursfs  explanation  of  the  original  Hebrew  word 
D^y  which  is  translated  in  the  English  version  "ev- 
erlasting;" and  then  notice  the  translation  of  this 
verv  Hebrew  word,  in  many  other  instances,  by  the 
authors  of  the  English  version;  and  lastly,  I  will 
repeat  the  context,  that  my  readers  may  be  able  to 
judge  whether  any  stress  can  be  laid  on  the  phrase 
alluded   to  bv  the    Editor. — First,  from  Park  hurst's 


*^ ; 


i 


\ 


\ 


*-i 


214 

Hebrew  and  English  Lexicon,  "  £D7i*  and  Db")J/*  are 
used  both  as  nouns  and  participles,  for  time    hidden 
and  concealed  from  man,  as  well  indefinite,  Gen.  xvii. 
8,  1  Sam.  xiii.  13,  2  Sam.  xii.  10,  and  eternal.  Gen.  iii. 
22,  Ps.  ix.  8,  as  fmite,  Exod.  \ix.  9,  xxi.  6,  1    Sam.  i. 
22,  comp.   ver.  28,  1  Sam.  xxvii.    12,   Isa.  xxxii.   14; 
as  well   past.   Gen.  vi  4,   Deut.  xxxii.  7,  Josh.   xxiv. 
2,  Psalm  xli.  14,  cxiii.  3,  Prov.  viii.  23,  as  future.      It 
seems  to  be  much  more  fiequently  used  for   an  indefi- 
nite^ than   for  infinite^   time.     Sometimes   it  appears 
particularly  to  denote  the  continuance  of  the  Jewish 
dispensation  or  age.  Gen.  xvii.  13,  Exod.  xii.  14,  24, 
xxvii.  21,  and  al.  freq.  and  sometimes  the   period  of 
time  to   the  Jubilee,  which  was   an  eminent  type  of 
the  completion  of   the  Jewish  and    typical   dispensa- 
tion, by  the  coming  and  death  of  Christ."     2dly,  the 
author  of  this  Lexicon  (though  devoted  to  the  cause 
of   the   Trinity)  gives  the   translation   of   the   term 
CD7li^    found   in  Mieah   v.  2.     in  the  course  of  ex- 
plaining the  force  of  the  word  NV^  says  he,  "  Micah 
V.    1,  or  2,  VnNVIOI  and   his  (the    Messiah's)  go- 
ings forth  have  been  from  of  old,  D^U*  ^^^^  ivom 
the  days  of  antiquity."     3dly,  from  the  English  ver- 
sion, Isaiah   Ixiii.  [II],  "Then   he   remembered  the 
iays  of  old^''  or  XZh^"^  ^0^  exactly  as  is  found  in  Mi- 
cah V.  2.      1  Sam.  xxvii.  8,  "  Those  nations  were  of 
old,"    for    the    same    Hebrew    term  O'^U'-     Hcut. 
xxxii.  7,  "  Remember  the  daijs  of  old^''  for  the  same 
Hebrew  word.    Gen.  vi.  4,  "  Which  were  of  old,  men 
of   renown,"    for   the   same    term    □'7')^.       Psalm 
Ixxvii.  5,  "  I  have  considered   the  days  of  old,  and 
the  years  of  ancient  times."    Here  the  term  DTp 


215 


which  is  rendered  in  Micah  v.  2,  "  o/'o/rf,"  and  the 
term  D")1)^  translated  in  the  same  verse  '^everlast- 
ing^'* are  both  mentioned.  4thly,  the  context  is 
verses  2 — 4  :  "  Whose  goings  forth  have  been,  from 
[of]  old,  from  everlasting;  therefore  will  he  give 
them  up,  until  tlie  time  that  she  which  travaileth 
hath  brought  forth ;  [then]  the  remnant  of  his 
brethren  shall  return  unto  the  children  of  Israel: 
and  he  shall  stand  and  feed  in  the  strength  of  the 
Lord,  in  the  majesty  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  his 
God,"  &c.  Can  the  phrases,  "  his  God,^'*  "  in  the 
strength  of  the  Lord,''^  and  "  his  brethren,^'*  be  consis* 
tently  used  for  one  who  is  the  everlasting  God?  If 
so,  how  can  we  reconcile  to  our  understanding  the 
idea  of  the  everlasting  God's  reigning  in  the  strength 
of  another,  having  the  Jews  as  his  brethren,  and 
looking  up  to  another  superior,  who  is  designated  by 
*'  his  God"?  If  a  body  of  men,  distinguished  for 
their  talents,  learning,  and  situation  in  life,  from  time 
to  time,  be  determined  to  support  their  long-estab- 
lished invention?,  in  defiance  of  scripture,  reason,  and 
common  sense  ;  how  can  truth  make  its  appearance, 
when  so  violently  resisted  ?  In  fact,  verse  2d  of 
Micah  thus  correctly  stands  :  "  Out  of  thee  (Beth- 
lehem) shall  he  (the  last-expected  Messiah)  come 
forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be  ruler  in  Israel,  whose 
sources''*'  of  springing  forth  have  been  from  of  an- 
cient, from  the  days  of  old." 

*  These  are  the  seed  of  Abraham  and  that  of  David,  through  which  God 
declares,  by  the  mouths  of  the  ancient  prophets,  that  he  will  raise  the  Messi- 
ah to  save  the  world. — Vide  Parkhurst's  Hebrew  Lexicon,  "  3,  The  place 
whence  any  thing  comes.  Job  xxviii.  1,  Isaiah  Iviii.  11,  Psalm  Ixv.  9,  Ixxv. 
7 ;  in  which  last  passage,  Kxio  is  used  for  that  part  of  the  heavens 
■^v hence  the  solar  light  Hi^  cometh  forth,  i.  c.  tlie  east.     Comp.  Ps.  xix.  6, 


!• 


i,' 


u 


.>4 


216 

The  Editor  advances,  that  "  even  son"  iniphes  an 
equality  of  nature  with  the  Father :  certainly  it 
does  so,  when  referred  to  one  carnally  begotten,  but 
otherwise  it  signifies  a  distinguished  creature.  1 
Chron.  xxviii.  6  :  "  And  he  said  unto  me,  Solomon  thv 
son,  he  shall  build  my  house  and  my  courts:  for  I  have 
chosen  him  to  be  my  son,  and  I  will  be  his  father." 
Job  i.  6  :  "  When  the  sons  of  God  came  to  present 
themselves  before  the  Lord,"  &c.  Is  Solomon,  be- 
cause he  is  called  a  son  of  God,  to  be  considered  a  par- 
taker of  the  divine  nature?  Are  the  angels,  designat- 
ed "  the  sons  of  God,"  considered  to  be  of  the  same 
nature  with  the  Deity  ?  The  Editor,  however,  adds, 
(page  594,)  '*  Our  author  hints,  that  in  the  sacred 
writings  others  have  been  termed  the  sons  of  God: 
this,  however,  only  proves,  that  Christ  is,  by  nature, 
the  Son  of  God,  while  all  others  are  the  sons  of 
God  by  adoption,  or  metaphorically."  To  establish 
Christ's  being  the  only  Son  of  God,  he  quotes  Rom. 
viii.  32,  in  which  Christ  is  termed  God's  own  son ; 
and  John  i.  16,  where  he  says,  that  "  the  Holy  Spirit 
also  terms  him,  not  merely  the  only  son,  but  the  only- 
begotten  son  of  the  Father."  I  therefore  quote  here 
verse  32  in  question,  with  the  preceding  verse  of  the 
same  chapter  of  Romans :  *'  What  shall  Ave  then 
say  to  these  things?  If  God  be  for  us,  who  can  be 
against  us  ?  He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  de- 
livered him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with  him 
also  freely  give  us  all  things?"  Here  St.  Paul  proves, 
beyond  doubt,  the  unlimited   mercy  of  God   towards 

7."  Parkhurst  also  rejects  the  popular  meaning,  saying,  "  Not  his  (Messi- 
ah's) eternal  generation  from  the  Father,  as  this  word  has  been  tortured  to 
signify." 


217 

LBcn,  as  manifested  by  his  appointment  of  his  own 
Son  to  save  mankind  from  death,  at  the  risk  of  the 
life  of  that  son,  without  limiting  th^  honor  of  a 
spiritual  birth  to  Jesus,  and  denying  to  others  the 
same  distinction,  who,  in  common  with  Jesus,  enjoy 
it  according  to  unquestionable  sacred  authorities. 
Deut.  xxxii.  18 :  "Of  the  Rock  that  begat  thee  thou 
art  unmindful."  Exodus  iv.  22  :  "  Israel  is  my  son, 
even  my  first-bomr  2  Sam.  vii.  14:  "I  will  be  his 
(Solomon's)  father,  and  he  shall  be  my  son.  If  he 
commit  iniquity,  I  will  chasten  him  with  the  rod  of 
men,  and  with  the  stripes  of  the  children  of  men." 
Did  St.  Paul  mean  to  destroy  the  validity  of  these, 
as  well  as  of  many  other  texts  to  a  similar  effect,  by 
representing  Christ  as  the  only  being  distinguished 
by  the  title  of  Son  of  God,  and  excluding  angels, 
Adam,  Israel,  Solomon,  and  David,  from  this  spiritu- 
al dignity  ?     I  firmly  believe  he  did  not. 

If  a  kmg,  who  had  several  children,  sent  one  of 
them  to  ^\ghi  battles  against  those  who  committed 
depredations  on  his  subjects,  and  his  son  so  sent, 
gained  a  complete  victory  in  that  war,  but  with  the 
loss  of  his  own  life  ;  and  if,  with  a  view  to  exalt  or 
magnify  the  attachment  of  this  sovereign  to  his  peo- 
ple, one  of  his  subjects  declares  that  his  sovereign 
was  so  deeply  interested  in  the  protection  of  his 
people  as  to  send  his  own  son,  even  the  most  belov- 
ed, to  repel  the  enemies  at  the  hazard  of  his  life, 
and  that  he  had  not  spared  his  own  son  in  securing 
the  lives  of  his  people  :  does  he  confine  the  royal 
birth  to  that  son,  or  does  he  degrade  other  sons  of 
the  king  from  that  dignity  ?     I  beg  my  readers  will 

28 


i  I- 


Vi 


i 


i; 


"i^ 


:  1: 


\ . 


I  < 


KtiSffia^i*! ^;^    "^^^^j^P*^**  ^'^  , 


218 

read.  Rom.  viii.  31,  32,  and  reflect  upon  their  pur- 
port.— Besides,  we  find  in  the  original  Hebrew,  Gen. 
i.  27,  "  God  created  man  in  his  image^'^  and  in  the 
English  version,  "  in  his  own  image,^^ 

Did  the  original  writer  of  Genesis  mean,  that  God 
created  man  in  some  fictitious  or  adopted  image  re- 
semblinor  that  of  God  ?  Did  the  authors  of  the  En- 
glish  version  violate  the  original  construction  by 
adding  the  word  "  oitvi,"  to  the  phrase  "  in  his  im- 
age ?"  Or  did  they  add  it  only  for  the  energy  of  ex- 
pression ?  Psalm  Ixvii.  6 ;  "  God,  even  our  own 
God,  shall  bless  us." — Does  the  writer  here  exclude 
God  from  being  the  God  of  the  world,  by  the  use 
of  the  word  own  in  the  verse,  against  the  declara- 
tion of  Paul  ?  Rom.  iii.  29,  ^'  Is  he  the  God  of  the 
Jews  only  ?  Is  he  not  also  of  the  Gentiles  ?  Yes, 
of  the  Gentiles  also."  Or  does  he  use  this  word  to 
shew  the  Israelites'  especial  attachment  to  God? 
In  1  Tim.  i.  2,  Paul  uses  the  expression,  "  Timothy, 
my  own  son  in  the  faith."  Did  he  thereby  exclude 
his  thousands  of  spiritual  disciples  from  being  his 
sons  in  the  faith  ? 

In  reply  to  his  allusion  to  John  i.  16,  in  which  Je- 
sus is  said  to  be  '•  the  only- begotten  Son  of  the 
Father,"  I  beg  to  refer  the  Editor  to  Heb.  xi.  17: 
"By  faith  Abraham,  when  he  was  tried,  offered  up 
Isaac  ;  and  he  that  had  received  the  promises  offer- 
ed up  his  only-begotten  son."  Whence  he  may  per- 
ceive that  the  phrase  "  only-begotten,"  im|)lics  only 
most  beloved  among  the  children,  as  Abraham  had, 
at  that  time,  another  son  beside  Isaac,  namely,  Ish- 
mael,  by  Hagar,  given  to  him  as  his  wife.  Gen.  xvi. 


219 

3,  15.  Were  we  to  take  the  word  of  John,  "  only- 
begotten,"  in  its  literal  sense,  in  defiance  of  Heb.  xi. 
17,  we  must  discredit  the  express  word  of  God,  de- 
claring Israel  his  begotten  and  first-born  son,  and  de- 
scribing David  to  be  his  begotten  son. 

It  is  worth  noticing,  that  the  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  applies  the  last  phrase,  "begotten 
son,"  in  an  accommodated  sense  to  Jesus,  Heb.  i.  5. 
I  say,  in  an  accommodated  sense,  since,  in  Psalm  ii. 
7,  it  is  David  that  declares,  during  the  prosperous 
time  of  his  reign,  "  The  Lord  hath  said  unto  me. 
Thou  art  my  5ow,  (his  day  have  I  begotten  thee." 
Besides,  how  can  the  orthodox  Christians,  who  con- 
sider Jesus  as  the  begotten  Son  of  God  from  eterni- 
ty, with  consistency  maintain  the  opinion,  that  God 
had  begotten  him,  at  a  particular  day,  during  the 
reign  of  David  ?  They  may,  perhaps,  apply  some 
of  their  mysterious  interpretations  to  this  passage  of 
the  Psalms ;  but  they  will,  of  course,  in  that  case, 
pardon  my  inability  to  comprehend  them.  1  will 
not  return  to  the  subject  of  Rev.  i.  8,  and  Heb.  i.  10, 
though  the  Editor  recurs  to  them  in  this  place. 

As  to  his  frequent  repetition  of  such  phrases  as 
"Jesus  is  Jehovah  God,"  "  a  tremendous  being  in  his 
wrath,"  &c.,  I  only  say,  they  are  best  calculated  to 
work  upon  the  minds  of  those  that  are  brought  up 
in  the  notion  of  the  Trinity,  but  do  not  carry  any 
weight  with  them,  in  an  argument  subject  to  the 
decision  of  an  enlightened  public. 

1  asserted  in  my  Second  Appeal,  that  Jesus  re- 
moved the  doubt  that  arose  with  regard  to  the 
sense  in  which  the  unitv  should  be  taken  in   John  x. 


1^ 


.  !il 


'-■  Ir' 


220 


30,  ("  I  and  my  Father  are  one,")  by  representing 
the  unity  so  expressed  to  be  such  as  he  prayed 
might  exist  amongst  his  apostles,  which  was,  of 
course,  the  unity  of  will  and  design,  and  not  identity 
of  being,  as  is  evident  from  John  xvii.  11,  "that  they 
[may]  be  one  as  we  artj''  and  verse  22,  "  that  they 
may  he  one^  even  as  we  are  one ;"  on  which  the 
Editor  makes  the  following  remarks. 

"  The  declaration,  John  xvii.  22,  '  that  they  [may] 
be  one  even  as  we  are  one,'  was  made  at  a  time,  and 
to  persons  totally  different  from  that  in  John  x.  30, 
'  I  and  my  Father  are  one ;'  the  latter  was  made  to 
the  gainsaying  Jews,  and  the  former  in  prayer  to  his 
heavenly  Father ;  nor  is  there  the  least  hint  given 
that  any  doubt  had  arisen  among  the  disciples  re- 
specting the  expression  *  I  and  my  Father  are  one.' " 
It  astonishes  me  very  much  to  meet  with  a  new  rule 
laid  down  by  the  Editor,  that  no  commentary  upon, 
or  explanation  of  a  passage  or  phrase  by  the  author 
of  it,  can  hav.e  any  weight,  if  it  is  made  or  given  at 
a  subsequent  period  in  the  course  of  a  solemn  pray- 
er to  God,  or  before  a  body  of  new  hearers,  without 
an  express  declaration  of  their  doubts  as  to  the 
meaning  of  it.  If  this  rule  stand  good,  many  com- 
mentaries and  notes  by  authors  on  their  respective 
works,  must  cease  to  be  of  use,  and  the  universally 
adopted  rule,  that  passages  of  scripture  should  be 
explained  by  their  reference  to  one  another,  must  be 
annulled.  In  ch.  x.  30,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one," 
Jesus  declares  unity  to  subsist  between  himself  and 
God;  and  in  ch.  xvii.  11  and  22,  by  praying  that 
"  they  (his  disciples)  may   be  one,  as    he   and   the 


221 

Father  are  one,"  he  explains  that  the  unity  between 
him  and  the  Father  was  of  the  same  kind  as  that 
which  he  prayed  to  be  granted  to  his  disciples ; 
hence  by  the  unity  so  prayed  for,  cannot  be  meant 
any  thing  else  than  unity  of  will  and  design.  Al- 
though that  unity  may  not  be  of  the  same  degree 
that  subsisted  between  him  and  the  Father,  yet  the 
force  of  the  preposition  "  as"  shews  that  it  is  of  the 
same  kind. 

Jesus  could  not  mean  in  praying  for  his  apostles 
verse  11,  an  unity  in  nature  among  them,  whence 
we  might  have  inferred  unity  in  nature  between  him 
and  his  God ;  since  they  were  long  before  this  pray- 
er created  in  the  one  human  nature ;  nor  could  he 
pray  for  a  renewed  spiritual  nature  to  be  given  to 
them,  (as  the  Editor  thinks  to  be  the  case,)  because 
they  were  already  endued  with  that  spiritual  union, 
as  is  evident  from  the  passage  of  the  very  chapter, 
(xvii.  [6,  8,  16,  22,])  "They  have  kept  thy  word." 
— ^"  And  have  known  surely  that  1  came  out  from 
thee,  and  they  have  believed  that  thou  didst  send 
me." — "  They  are  not  of  the  world,  even  as  1  am  not 
of  the  world,'''* — ^"  The  glory  which  thougavest  me,  / 
have  given  themy  Besides,  unity  in  spiritual  nature 
is  not  the  same  kind  of  unity  which  subsists  between 
the  individuals  of  one  nature. 

Supposing  unity  of  nature  existed  between  God 
and  Jesus  Christ,  (as  the  Editor  believes,)  in  the 
same  manner  as  it  is  found  in  one  begotten  by  a  man 
or  animal,  and  his  parents,  and  that  Jesus  actually 
meant  by  the  words,  "  my  Father,"  in  verse  30,  to 
affirm  God  to  be  his  real  Father,   would  it  not  be 


r 


I" 
I' 


•  I 


t 


"i 


i     I 


■•-«'    J.         -^  m^'Gl!^ 


222 

quite  idle  in  Jesus  to  have  declared,  that  he  as  a  Son 
was  of  the  same  nature  with  his  Father,  instead  of 
saying  that  he  was  a  Son  entertaining  the  same  will 
and  design  with  his  Father,  since  the  former  circum- 
stance is  natural  and  obvious,  but  the  latter  is  not  al- 
ways found  to  exist,  as  we  daily  find  among  the  chil- 
dren of  men  ?  Were  the  circumstance  of  one's  calling 
God  his  Father  received  as  a  proof  of  his  being  ac- 
tually the  son  of  God,  and,  of  course,  of  his  unity  in 
nature  with  the  Deitv,  we  must  consider  David  as 
a  real  son  of  God,  and  of  the  same  nature.  Psalm 
Ixxxix.  26  :  "  He  shall  cry  unto  me,  Thou  art  my 
Father,  my  God,  and  the  rock  of  my  salvatiori  ;" 
and  we  also  must  esteem  Israel  one  in  nature  with 
God;  (Jer.  iii.  4,  "Wilt  thou  not  from  this  time 
cry  unto  me.  My  Father,  thou  art  the  guide  of  my 
youth?")  Wo  must  even  admit  all  Christians  to  be 
one  in  nature  with  the  Father  of  the  universe,  for 
we  are  taught  to  pray  to  our  Father  in  heaven, 
Matt.  vi.  9.  See  also  verses  1,  4,  6,  8,  14,  15,  18. 
and  32  of  the  same  chapter.  John  xx.  17:  "Mv 
Father  and  your  Father,"  &c.  2  Cor.  i.  3  :  "  The 
Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  and  "  the  Father 
of  mercies,"  &c.  To  enable  my  readers  to  take  a 
clear  view  of  this  passage,  1  here  quote  the  context, 
as  well  as  the  note  found  in  the  improved  Version 
upon  it.  Vers.  29,  30  :  "  My  Father,  who  gave  them 
me,  is  greater  than  all  :  and  none  is  able  to  pluck 
them  out  of  my  Father's  hand.  I  and  my  Father 
are  one  :"  that  is,  "  To  snatch  my  true  disciples  out 
of  my  hand  would  be  to  snatch  them  out  of  my  al- 
mighty Father's  hand ;  because  «  I  and   mv  Father 


223 


are  one  ;'  one  in  design,  action,  agreement,  aflection. 
Seech,  xvii.  11,  21,  22.  1  Cor.  iii.  8:  'Now  he 
that  planteth,  and  he  that  watereth  are  one.' "  (Im- 
proved Version.)  Both  in  the  scriptures,  and  in 
ordinary  composition,  unity,  when  referred  to  two 
substances,  implies  invariably  perfect  concord  of  will, 
or  some  other  qualities,  and  by  no  means  oneness  of 
nature, — a  fact  which  my  readers  will  perceive  by 
a  slight  attention  to  the  common  usage  of  language, 
and  also  to  the  following  verses:  Gen.  ii.  24  :  "  And 
he  (the  husband)  shall  cleave  unto  his  wife,  and  they 
two  shall  be  one  flesh:''  Ezek.  xxxvii.  19:  "1  will 
take  the  stick  of  Joseph,  and  will  put  them  with  him, 
even  with  the  stick  of  Judah,  and  make  them  oxe 
stick,  and  they  shall  be  one  in  mine  hand."  1  Cor. 
x.  17:  "  For  we  being  many  are  one  bread,  and  one 
body  ;  for  we  are  all  partakers  of  that  one  bread." 
1  never  amused  myself  with  the  thought  that 
Christ  did  "  pray  that  his  disciples  might  be  one 
with  him  and  his  heavenly  Father,"  nor  did  1  ever 
rejoice  at  the  idea,  that  Jesus,  "  a  man  approved  of 
God,"  was  one  in  nature  with  the  invisible  Most 
High  ;  I  only  observed  in  my  Second  Appeal,  that 
if  Trinitarian  authors  succeeded  in  their  attempt  to 
prove  the  deity  of  Jesus  Christ  from  a  perverted  in- 
terpretation of  such  phrases  as  "  the  Father  in  me 
and  I  in  him  ;"  "  he  dwelleth  in  God,  and  God  in 
him ;"  they  would  unavoidably  increase  the  number 
of  the  persons  of  the  godhead  much  beyond  three, 
since  similar  expressions  are  frequently  found  applied 
lo  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  John  xiv.  20:  "At  that 
tlav  ye  shall  know,  (addressins:  himself  to  his  disci- 


<! 


^ 


1 1  \ 


\  i 


n. 


>• 


224 

pies,)  [that]  I  am  in  my  Father,  and  ye  in  me,  and  J 
in  you.^^  Ch.  xvii.  21  :  "Thou,  Father,  art  in  me, 
and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  on§  in  usJ*^  John 
vi.  56  :  "  He  that  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my 
blood,  dwelleth  in  me,  and  I  in  him."  1  John  iv.  15  : 
«  Whosoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of 
God,  God  dwelleth  in  him,  and  he  in  God,^^  2  Peter 
i.  4 :  "  That  by  these  ye  might  be  partakers  of  the 
divine  nature." 

The  Editor  seems  displeased  at  my  having  declin- 
ed to  submit  indiscriminately  to  my  countrymen  the 
whole  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament,  because  cer- 
tain passages  therein,  having  undergone  human  dis- 
tortions, occasion  much  dispute.  I  therefore  beg  to 
refer  him  to  page  17  of  this  Essay,  as  well  as  to  all 
church  history,  vi^hich  shew  that  my  plan  was  con- 
formable to  the  example  laid  down  by  the  apostles 
and  primitive  Christians,  who  used  to  accommodate 
their  instructions  to  the  gradual  progress  of  their  fol- 
lowers. 

In  answer  to  his  question, "  How  was  it  that  I  did 
not  feel  struck  with  the  absurdity  of  a  creature's 
creating  all  things,"  &c.?  1  beg  only  to  reply  by 
another  question,  viz.  How  does  the  Rev.  Editor 
justify  the  idea,  that  one  who  was  in  the  human 
shape,  possessed  of  human  feelings,  and  subject  to 
the  calls  of  nature,  was  the  very  God  whom  he  de- 
fines as  existing  forever,  immaterial,  invisible,  and 
above  all  mortal  causes  or  effects  ? 

The  Rev.  Editor  says,  that  "nothing  can  be 
more  incorrect  than  my  assertion,  page  168,  that 
Jesus  in  John  x.  <  disavowed  the   charge  of  making 


225 

liimsclf  God'; — after  having  borne  the  fullest   lesii- 
mony  to  his  equality  with  God,   in   cfiapters   v.  and 
viil.,   :it  length  prevaricntes,  and  rctractb  for  fear  of 
death."     I  tlierefore   refer  to  chapters   v,  a?id   vlli. 
and    now    ask    the     Editor    whether    he    calls    the 
following  sayings  of  Jesus,  found  in  c!ia|>ters  v.  and 
viii.  the  fullest  testimonies  to  his  equalilj^  with  God  ? 
"The  Son  can  do   nothing  of  himself.''     "Fortiic 
Father  loveth  the  Son,   and    sheuc/h  him   all    tl)in<rs 
that  himself  doeth."     "  So  t}\c  Son  qulckeneth  whom 
he  will;  for    the  Father  judgetli   no  man,  but  hat!i 
comm'tted  i\\\  judgment   unto  the    Son."     "He    that 
heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  on  him  that  sent  mc, 
hath  everlasting  life.'^     "  So  hath  he  giosn  to  the  Sou 
to  have  life  m  himself,  and  hath  given  him   autliori- 
ty,"  *!v:c.     "  I  can  of  mine  ownself  do  nothirjo."     '*  J 
seek  not   mine  own  will,  but  the  will   of  theVather 
who  hath  sent   mcr     "For   the    works    which  the 
Father  hath  jriven  me    to  finish,"  Uc.     "  I  am  come 
HI  my  Father's  name:'     Ch.  viii.  :  "  But  he  that  sent 
mo.  is  truer     "  I  do   notJdng    of  myself,   but    as   mv 
Father  hath  taught  me  I  9j)eak  these  things."    "  But 
now  ye  seek  to  kill  me,  n  man  that  hath  told  you  the 
tnitli  which  1  liave  heard  ofGoJr     "  Neither  came 
1    myself,    but  he  sent  mc"     "  1  seek    not  mine  own 
^lory."     «  I  know  him  (God)  and  keep  his  saying:''' 
Do  these    testimonies  amount  to  the  cqimVity  of  Je- 
sus with    his   God   and    FatI.er?    If  so,   the    Editor 
must  have  in  view  a  definition  of  the  term  "equality" 
quite  dilFerent  from  that    maintained   by    the    world. 

.',^V!°''*^'"»  ^    23,   I  begj  (o  refer  mv  re.iders  to  the   subspquent    rh«pt«vr 
I  iriis  Jtssaj,  where  I  will  ex.iiiiinr  thv  same  vprse  fully. 


i* 


^■^ifei- 


f 


W1 


226 

I  at  the  same  tl.nj  entreat  the  Editor  to  point  out 
a  sia^^Ie  verse,  in  either  of  thtie  two  chapters,  con- 
taining a  prDof  of  the  eqjallty  of  Jesus  Christ  w:lh 
God,  setting  in  defiance  a!!  the  phrases  1  have  now 
quoted  frun.  these  very  chapters.  After  reflecting 
upon  the  above-cited  phrases,  the  Editor  v;il!,  I  ho^jo 
spare  the  charge,  that  Jesjs  "at  length  prevaricates 
and  retracts  for  fear  of  death  ;*"  for  his  disavowal 
of  deity  in  ch.  x.  3li,  was  quite  consit^tent  with  ail 
the  doctrines  and  precepts  that  he  tauglit  in  t!ie 
evangelical  \\ritings.  (Vide  the  whole  of  the  four 
Gospels.) 

Tiie  Editor  then  adds,  th^t  "  the  confession  (!n  x. 
34 — 3o,)  which  our  author  terms  a  disavowal  of  de- 
ity, was    the   very  confession  for  which  they  sought 
again  to  take  h!iu,  because  they  slill  tiiouglit  ho  mudc 
himself  God."      I  am,  therefore,  under  the  necessity 
of  quoting  the  context,  to  shew  that  the  Jews  seem- 
ed appeased  at  llie    cxplajaiicn  given  by  Jcbus  him- 
self, as  to  their  niibunderjtanding  of   him,  and    that 
they  sought  again  to  take  him  on  account  of   anoth- 
er subsaquent  assertion  of  his.     The  context  is,  (32 
— 33,)  *'  Many  good  works  have  I  shewed  }ou  from 
ray  Father  ;   for   v/hich  of    those    works  do  ye  stone 
me?  The  Jews  answered  him,   saving.  For   a  good 
work  we  stone  thee  not;  but  for  blasphemy,  and  be- 
cause that  thou,  being  a    man,  niakcst  thyself  Gud. 
Jesus  answered  them.  Is    it  not  ^vntten  in   your  law, 
I  said  ye  are  gods?   If    he    called    them   gods   unto 
whom  the  word   of   God  came,  (and  the  scrij^ture 
cannot  be  broken,)  say  ye  of  him  whom  the  Father 
hath  ranctihed,  and   sent  into  the  world,  thuu  bla^- 


227 

j-'hoinest,  because  I  said  I  am  llie  Sen  of  Goti  ?  If  1 
do  not    the    works  of  my  Tatlicr,  buiiavc  me  not : 
but  if  I   do,  tliougli   ye    be'.iove  iioi  uic,  believe   the 
works;   that    ye   may   know    aiij    believe    that    the 
Fatlicr  is    in   nit,*   and    I    in    him.      Therefore  they 
sought  a^rain  to    take    him,  but   he  escaptd   out  of 
tjjeir  hand."     Does  not  Jesus  here  appeal  to  scrip- 
turo,  on  the  ground  that  if  llic  sacred  writi.sgs,  e\ery 
assertion  of  which  la  but  true,  arc  justified  in  caihi.^ 
magistrates  and  prophets  -ods,  and  tliat  the  Jews  in 
rending-  the  scriptures  sfylcJ  ti;ose  superiors  by   the 
epilliet  gods,  in  conforr.iity  to  tlieir  scriptures,  they 
could   not  in  justice  accuse   him,  the  sanciilied   Mes- 
siah of  God,  of  blasphemy,  for  his  having  called  him- 
self only  the  Son  of  God  ?  Does  not   Jesus  here  jus- 
tify   the  use  of  the  phrase  "  Son  of  God,"  for   hlm- 
■^elf,  ,n  the  same  mctaphorica;  sense    that  the  term 
"Gods"  v.as  used  for  the  magisiiates   and  prophets 
among  I,,ael  <?  U  so,   he  of  course  relinquishes  his 
<-iaim  to  the  use  of  the  phrase  «  God,"  and  «  Son  of 
G  jd-  m  its  real  sense.     If  a  commoner,  who  holds  a 
liigii  Situation  ui.der  government,  sutlers  himself  to 
be  called  "  honorable,"  and,  consequently,  be  accus- 
ed of  presumption  in  permitting  himself  to  be  desi- 
uated  by  that  f.de,  on  the  ground  that    he   was   not 
uctuully  the  son  of  a  nobleman,  would  he  not  justify 
h.n.sdf  against  this  charge  by  saying,  "  You  call  all 
ijie  judges  Lords  in   their  judicial  capacity,  though 
llicy  aro  not  noblemen  by  birth  ;  yet  you  chnrge  me 
(H'.io  h.ld  a  moi'e  digni.'ied  situation  than  the  judges; 


n 


■  r. 
i 


i  i 


*    i 


..s 


I;  i 


I    1 


wllh  arrogance,  bucause  J  suffer  injself  to  be  ad- 
dressed as  '  honora!)lc' — a  title  wliich  the  cbildreu 
of  no!)lonKn  enjoy'"  ?  In  following  the  example  of 
Jesus,  [  now  appeal  to  srri[)ture,  and  also  to  coni- 
rnon  sense,  that  my  readers  may  judge  thereby 
^vIlelher  verses  34 — 36  contain  a  confession  of  God- 
head, or  a  disavowal  of  deity,  made  by  Jesus  him- 
self. 

,  It  is    not  only   a   single    instance,   in    which   Jesus 
omitted   to  correct    the  Jews  in    their   misconceiving 
tfie  phrase,   "The  Fatlier  is  in  me,  and    I  in  him,-' 
(verse  38,)  but  in  many  otlier  Instar.ces,  he  left  them 
in  ignorance.     (John  il.    19,21.)     Vv'hen  Jesus  told 
the  Jews  to  destroy  the  temple,  that  lie  might  raise 
it  a/ain  in  three  days,  they   misunderstood  him,  and 
sup[)oscd  that  he  intended  to  raise  the  temple  of  Je- 
ii.salem,  and  found  fault  with  him,  from  this  miscon- 
ceived notion,  before  the   high-prics.t.     John    ii.  21  : 
^^But  he  spoke  of  the  temple  of  his  body  ;"  as  well 
as  John  vii.   34—33,  viii.  21,  22,  as  I  noticed  before 
in    pages   05,  203.     The    Editor,  last  y,  says,    tliat 
'•Jesus  at  la,t  cho^e  to  die  under  this  very  charge, 
rather  than   clear    up  the    ml=ta^;e,  if   it    was   such. 
This  was  their  last  and  grand  charge:  '-We  have  a 
law,  and  by    that   law  he   ouglit  to  die,   because    he 
made  himself  the   Son  of  God,'  which  they  esteem- 
ed blasphemy  worthy  of  death."     The  Editor  must 
be  well  aware  that  the  Jews  had  such  an  inveterate 
enmity  against  Jesus,  that  they  not  only  eharged  Inni 
with  what  they  found  in   him  contrary  to  their  law, 
but   even    with    wHCul  {exaggerations.     John   v.    1.0: 
"The  man  departed  and    told  the  Jews,  that  it  was 


229 


Jesus  v/ho  had  made  him  whole."     Ver.  10:'-  And 
therefore  did  the  Jews   persecute  him,  (Jesus,)  and 
sought  to  slay  him,  because  he  had  done  these  things 
on  the  sabbath   day."     (To   perform  a  cure  on  t.'ie 
sabbath  day,  is  supposed  by  the  Jews  to  be  a  breach 
of  the  traditions  of  the  elders,  and  not  a  crime  wor- 
thy of  death;  yet  they  sought   to    kill   Jesus  under 
that    pretence.)     Ver.    17:    "But   Jesus    answered 
them.  My    Father    worketh    hitherto,   and  I    work. 
Tiierefore  the  Jews  souglit  the  more  to  kill  him,  be- 
cause he  not  only   had  broken  t!ie  sabbath,  but  said 
also  that  God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal 
with  God."     Although  the    Jews,  in   their  own   de- 
fence, called  God    tlieir   Fatlier,  without  subjecting 
themselves  to  the  chirge  of  blasphemy;    (John  viii. 
41,  "  yVc  have  onefitihcr  even  God,''')  yet  they  sought 
to    Kill  Jesus  on    t!ie  false  ground,  tliat  he  equalized 
himself  with  God  bv  callini;-  Gcd  his  Father.      It    is 
worth  observing,   that,   lest    the  Jews  should    infer 
liis    independence   in    doing  miracles,   and  wrest    his 
words    fiom  the    jurjose,    ("  JMy   Father    worketh 
hitlierto,  and  1  work,")  Jesus  firmly  avows  his  entire 
dependence  on  God  in  whatever  he  had  performed, 
in  verse  19,  ("  Veriiv,    I  say  unto  you,  the  Son  cax 
do  nothing  [of]  himself,"  &c.)  and  also  in  the  follow- 
ing verses,  insom.jch  that   the  Jews,  being  unable  to 
find    any    plea    for   his  destruction,  remained    quiet, 
and  left  Jesus  in  peace.     (Vide  tlie  whole  of  ch.  v.) 
In  Lake  xxiii.  2,  the  Jews  charged  him  with  having 
j>f)rverted  the  nation  by  representing  himself  as  their 
king,  and  havii.g  forbidden  to  give  tribute   to  Caesar 
a  charge  which  was  full  of  misrej)resentation. 


;      X 


1     t 


l<.i 


\ 


t  i 


■--t; 


230 


Let  us   return  now    to    the    text   quoted    hy    llie 
Rev.  Editor  :  "  We  have  a  hiw,  aiid  b}  cur  Kiw  he 
ought  to   die,  because   he    made   himself  the  Soft  of 
6W ;"    whence  it    is  evident,  that,    notwiths.aridliitr 
the  great  hatred  uliich  the  Je>vs  entertained  towards 
our  Saviour,  and   the    mihreprrsenlatlcn    they    uere 
guilty  of  in  theii*  accusation  against  liim,  the  severest 
charge  vviiich   they  preferred  under  the  presence  of 
rehgion,    was,  tliat   *^  lie    made    himself    the   Son  of 
God,*'  and  they  would  have,  of  course,  accused  him 
of  iiaving  made   himself  God,  to  P.late,  whom  they 
found  inclined   to  release    Jesus,   and    in  presence  of 
the  multitude,  this  being  better  calculated  to  excite 
the    vvralh  of    the  latter  and  horror  of   the    fornjer, 
had  the  Jews  eve.*   heard  him  declare  himself  God, 
or  say   any  thing  that   amounted  to  his  claim  to  tiic 
godhead.      The  high-priest  and  other  chief  accusers 
knew   very    well    that    their  people  were  taught    to 
consider  God  as  their  feather,  and  to  call  themselves 
the  children  of   the  iMost  High  (correctly   speakin^r, 
the  .soa5  of  the    Most   High,    Psaim   kxxii.  (i)  ;  and 
tins   idea   wr.s    so   fannliar  among  iJiem,  that   Jesus 
also  admitted  them  to  be  the  particular   children  of 
the  Deity.      Mark  vii.  27  :  '^  But  Jesus  said  unto  her. 
Let  the  cliildren  {w^i  be  filied,"  »fcc. 

The  Editor  sa>s,  (page  51>7,)  that  ^' our  author 
queries  on  what  principle  any  stress  can  be  laid  on 
the  prophetic  expression  quoted  in  lleb.  i.  from  flie 
Psalms,  'Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  forever  and  ever,' 
We  reply  merely  on  this  principle,  that  it  is  spoken 
by  God,  who  cannot  lie.*'  Are  not  these  words 
also,  ^'  Ye   are    Gods,''  spoken    by  Him  wl:o  cannot 


231 

lie?  li  not  the  \Q^vy  verse  of  Hebrews,  **  Thy 
throne,  O  G3d,  is  forever  and  ever,'*  applied  origin- 
ally to  Solomon  by  Him  v/ho  camut  he,  and,  in  an 
accomnodated  sense,  to  Jesus  by  theaprstle?  I 
will  not  iiitroduce  the  subject  agan,  it  having  Leeu 
noticed  in  page  99.  The  Editor  ex-jresses  his  as- 
tonishment at  what  1  say  in  the  Second  Appeal,  that 
the  phrase  ''forever''  must  mean  a  limited  tiuje 
when  referred  to  an  eartlily  king  or  a  creature,  and 
therefore  it  carries  no  weight  in  the  proof  of  the 
deity  of  Jesus,  when  applied  to  him.  The  reason 
vvhich  he  assigns  for  his  surprise  is,  Ho\4^  cojld  1  take 
this  phrase  in  a  finite  sense  when  applied  to  Jesus, 
the  eternal  Jehovah?  Did  not  tlie  Editor  feel  as- 
tonis!ied  at  the  idea  tliat  he  employs  the  application 
of  the  phrase  •'  forever''  in  his  attempt  to  prove  the 
deity  of  Jesus,  and  then  employs  the  circumstance  of 
the  eternal  deity  of  Jesus'  for  tiie  purpose  of  prov- 
ing that  infinite  duration  is  understood  by  the  phrase 
'*  forever,"  when  referred  to  Jesus  ? 

As  he  admits  that  '•  forever,"  when  referred  to  a 
creature,  implies  a  limited  time  only;  he  therefore, 
must  spare  this  phrase,  and  try  to  quote  seme  other 
term  peculiar  to  God,  in  his  endeavor  to  eslablisli  the 
deity  of  Jesus. 

The  Editor  says,  that  the  expression  of  J-^sus  to 
Mary,  (John  xx.  17,)  '*  Go  to  my  brethren,  and  say 
unto  them,  I  ascend  unto  iny  Father. and  jour  Fath- 
er, and  to  my  God  and  your  God,"  was  merelv  in 
his  huiuan  naiure.  I  wisli  the  Editor  had  furnisii- 
ed  us  with  a  list,  enumerating  those  expressions  that 
.lesjs  Christ  made  in  his  imman  capacitv,  and  anotli- 


1^  =! 


1  If 


-  i 


\   ■' 


'    i 


\ 


!!l 


1 


232 

er  shewing  such  d<)clar;U*o:is   ns   he   made  in  his  ti- 
rine  nature,  with   authorities  for   the   distinction.     I 
miglit  have,  in  that  case,  attcntivelj  examined  iheni, 
33  well  as  tijeir  autliorilies.     From  his  £:eneral  mode 
of   reasoning,  I   am  induced   to    think,   that   he   will 
sometimes  be  obhgrd,  in  cxj)Liining  a  siiigle  sentence 
in  the  scriptures,  to  ascribe  a  part  of  it  to  Jesus  as  a 
man,  and  another  part  to   him   in   his  divina  nature. 
As  for  example,  John  v.    22,  23:  "For  the  Father 
judgeth  no  man,    but  hath    oommitted  all  judgmer.t 
unto  the  Son,    that  ail   men  should  honor   the    Son 
even  as  they  lionor  the  Futher.      He  that   honoretli 
not   the   Soil,  honor-th  not  t'le  Father  who  [liath] 
sent  me    [liimj".     The    first   part   of  tiiis  sentence, 
"  hathcomraitted  all  ji-dgernent  unto  the  Son,"  must 
have  been  (accotding  to  the  Editor)  spoken  in  tlie  hu- 
man nature  of  Jesus  Christ,  since  the  Almighty,  in  ex- 
ercising his  power,  does  not  s}ai;d  in  need  of  another's 
vesting  him  witli  that  power.     Tiie   second  part   of 
the  sa-ne  sentence,    "  all   men  should  honor  the   Son 
[even]  as  they  honor  the  Father,''  must   be  ascribed 
by  tlie  EJitor  to  Jesus  as   God,  he  having  been  wor- 
thy.to   be  honored  as   the  Father  is.    And   the  last 
part,  "who  hath    sent  me,  [!:im,]"  relates  again  to 
Christ's  human  capacity,  since  it  implies  his  subjection 
to  ti]e  disposal  of  anotlier.      Is   this  the  infernal  evi- 
dence of  Christianity  on  wiiich  the  orthodox  divines 
lay  stress?  Surely  not. 

As  to  the  exclamation  of  Tliomas,  (John  xx.  28,) 
"My  Lord  a:id  my  God."  It  is  neither  a  confession 
of  the  supreme  dc'iiy  of  Jesus  by  him,  nor  is  it  a 
>ain  exclamation,  since   \t  is  evident,  from  verse  2r>. 


233 

that  Thomas  doubted  Christ's  resurrection  without 
any  reference  to  his  deity;  and  that,  when  he  saw 
Jesus  and  the  print  of  the  nails,  he  believed  it,  and 
bemg  struck  with  such  a  circumstance,  made  the  ex- 
clamation, "  My  Lord  and  my  God  !"  according  to 
the  invariable  habits  of  the  Jews,  Arabs,  and  almost 
all  other  Asiatic  nations,  who,  when  struck  with  won- 
der, often  make  exclamations  in  the  name  of  the 
Deity  ;  and  that  Jesus,  from  these  apparent  circum- 
stances, and  having  perceived  his  heart,  says,  '^  be- 
cause tfiou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast  believed"  (verse 
29)  ;  by  which  Jesus  acknowledges  the  belief  of 
Thomas  in  the  fact  which  he  doubted  in  verse  25, 
that  is,  his  resurrection  ;  for  the  subject  in  question,  as 
it  stands  in  the  context,  has  no  allusion  to  the  deity  of 
Jesus;  and  the  form  in  which  a  confession  is  made,  is 
totally  different  from  that  of  exclamation,  both  in 
the  scriptures  and  in  ordinary  language.  How  can 
Thomas  be  supposed  to  have  meant  to  confess  the 
deity  of  Jesus  in  a  mere  exclamation,  "  My  Lord  and 
my  God!"  without  adding  some  phrase  conveyino- 
confession,  such  as  "Thou  art"  my  Lord  and  my  GocU 
and  "  1  believe  you  to  be"  my  Lord  and  my  God  ? 
I  beg  that  my  readers  will  attentively  refer  to  the 
context,  and  to  the  common  habits  of  Asiatics  on  oc- 
casions similar  to  this,  and  form  their  opinion  respect- 
ing this  subject.  The  Editor  quotes  Matt.  v.  37, 
which,  with  its  context,  forbids  all  sorts  of  swearing  ; 
but  what  relation  this  has  to  the  exclamation  of 
Thomas,  in  John  xx.  28,  I  am  unable  to  discover. 

The  Editor  quotes  six  passages  from   the  Gospel 
and  the    book  of  the   Revelation,  four   of   which    f 


K. 


f 


V 


>* 


.  li 


>il 


ii 


:;*  ' 


\! 


( 


234 


have  already  examined,  and  I  notice  now  the 
remaining  two  verses.  First,  John  i.  1  :  "  In  the  be- 
ginning was  the  word,  and  the  word  was  with  God, 
and  the  word  was  God."  By  the  first  sentence, 
("in  the  beginning  was  the  word,")  the  Editor  at- 
tempts to  prove  the  eternity  of  the  Son ;  by  the 
second,  ("  the  word  was  with  God,")  his  distuict  per- 
sonahty ;  and  by  the  third,  Q'  the  word  was  God,") 
his  deity. 

Let  us  first  take  this  verse  in  il's  literal  sense,  and 
ascertain  whether  or  not  it  is,  in  that  case,  intelligi- 
ble. "  In  the  beginning" — i.  e.  in  the  first  time — 
"  was  the  word" — i.  e.  existed  such  a  sound  as  was  ca- 
pable of  conveying  a  meaning.  "  The  word  was 
with  God" — i.  e.  this  sound  existed  in  the  Deity,  since 
no  sound  can  exist  of  itself.  "  Tlie  word  was  God" — 
i.  e.  the  word  was  the  deity,  or  a  deity,  or  being  like 
other  attributes  of  the  deity — it  was  divine.  The 
whole  verse  thus  stands :  "  From  the  beginning  the 
word  of  God,  or  Revelation  manifesting  his  will  and 
commandments,  existed  with  him  as  God  himself;" 
and  by  the  same  word  God  made  or  established  all 
things  ;  as  the  Jewish  and  Mohummudan,  as  well  as 
Hindoo,  theologians  believe,  on  the  authority  of  the 
works  respectively  acknowledged  by  them,  that  God 
made  and  established  all  things  by  his  word  only. 
(Vide  Gen.  i.  3,  et  seq.)  And  he  communicated  that 
Revelation  to  the  world  through  Jesus  Christ,  (as 
testified  beforehand  by  John  the  Baptist,)  for  the 
purpose  of  effecting  the  salvation  of  those  that  re- 
ceived and  believed  the  authority  of  that  Revelation. 


235 


This  IS  detailed  throughout  verses  2 — 12."*  In  verses 
13,  14,  John  expressly  personifies  *'  the  word"  in  Je- 
sus, as  the  bearer  and  deliverer  of  that  Revelation: 
"  The  word  was  made  flesh,"  (or  the  word  was 
flesh,)  "  and  dwelt  among  us,"  &:c.  To  explain  fully 
this  metaphorical  representation,  John  designates  Je- 
sus by  this  name,  with  the  additional  words  "  of  life," 
once  in  his  Epistle,  1  John  i.  1,  "  The  word  of  life," 
and  with  the  additional  words  "  of  God,"  once  in 
Rev.  xix.  13,  "His  name  is  called  The  Word  of 
God;"  whereby  he  manifests  that  Jesus,  as  the  de- 
liverer of  the  w^ord  of  God,  is  called  by  that  name, 
and  not  actually  identified  with  the  word,  as  otheiv 
wise  might  have  been  supposed  from  his  Gospel,  i. 
1.  John  i.  1,  is  not  the  only  instance  in  which  an 
attribute  of  the  Deity  is  thus  represented  as  one  with 
God;  for  the  very  same  writer  identifies  love  with 
the  Deity,  in  John  iv.  8,  16,  on  the  ground  that 
love  is  of  God,  and  is  manifested   in  the   world  by 


iim, 


1  John  iv.  7. 


Secondly,  I  have  to  notice  the  orthodox  exposi- 
tion of  the  verse  in  question :  they  interpret  the 
word  "  beginning,"  as  signifying  all  eternity,  and  by 
the  term  "  word,"  they  understand  Jesus  the  Son  of 
God  ;  that  is,  from  all  eternity  the  Son  of  God  exist- 
ed with  God  distinct  in  person,  and  he  was  also 
God.  The  interpretation  is,  I  presume,  equally  un- 
scriptural  as  it  is  revolting  to  the  understanding,  and 
for  several  reasons  :  First,  as  long  as  a  passage 
can    be   consistently     taken   and    understood    in   its 

*  The  reason  for  the  use  of  the  masculine  gender  in  these  verses,  both  in 
the  original  Gospel  and  in  tlie  English  version,  is  obvious,  as  the  original 
word  Aoyoj,  signifying  the  "  woid,"  is  masculine. 


}i 


ii  t 


Mi   < 


236 

literal  sense,  there  can  be  no  apology  for  taking  it  in 
a  figurative  one.  Here  we  find  no  authority  for 
identifying  Jesus  with  the  -Mvord,"  or  designating 
him  by  that  term  in  any  of  the  preceding  gospels  ; 
he  is  only  figuratively  so  called  in  Rev.  by  the  name 
of  "the  word  of  God."  Under  these  circumstances, 
to  understand  Jesus  literally  and  so  abruptly,  by  the 
term  "  word,"  in  John  i.  1,  (against  the  established 
doctrine  of  the  Jews  and  the  rest  of  the  oriental  na- 
tions,) and  to  assume  this  word  as  existent  in  the  be- 
ffinnino:,  and  as  instrumental  in  the  hands  of  God,  in 
moral  and  physical  creations,  is  entirely  inadmissable. 
2dly,  The  Evangelist  John,  in  his  Gospel,  uses  the 
word  "  beginning"  in  a  finite  sense,  and  generally  im- 
plying the  beginning  of  the  Christian  dispensation, 
John  xvi.  4,  xv.  27,  viii.  25,  44,  vi.  64,  ii.  1 1,  and  not 
once  for  "  all  eternity."  Hence,  to  understand  the 
word  "  beginning"  in  an  infinite  sense,  is  opposed  to 
the  sense  adopted  throughout  the  whole  of  his  Gos- 
pel. 3dly,  In  the  first  verse  of  Genesis,  "  In  the 
besfinnins:  God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth," 
we  find,  in  a  similar  connexion,  the  same  phrase,  "  in 
the  beginning."  Were  we  to  follow  the  orthodox 
interpretation,  and  take  it  in  an  infinite  sense,  (i.  e. 
from  eternity  God  created  the  earth  £»nd  heavens,) 
we  should  be  compelled  to  profess  the  eternity  of  the 
world  and  become  materialists.  4thly,  To  acknowl- 
edge the  Son  to  be  the  true  God,  and  to  have  lived 
with  the  true  God  from  eternity,  destroys  at  once 
the  idea  of  the  unity  of  God,  and  proves,  beyond 
every  question,  the  plurality  of  the  Deity.  For,  if 
we  see  one   real    man  living^  with  another  real   itian. 


i  4- 


237 


though  both  of  them  are  one  in  nature  and  design, 
are  we  not  compelled,  by  the  ordinary  course  of  na- 
ture, to  apprehend  the  duality  of  man,  and  to  say 
that  there  are  two  men?  Can  orthodox  ingenuity 
prove,  that  there  are  not  two,  but  one  man,  or  pre- 
vent the  comprehension  of  the  duality  of  man?  If 
not,  1  wish  to  know  whether,  after  admitting  that  the 
real  God,  the  Son,  exists  with  the  real  God,  the 
Father,  from  eternity,  the  Editor  can  consistently 
deny  the  existence  of  two  real  Gods?  5tlily,  The 
exposition  of  the  Editor  must  render  John  i.  1,  di- 
rectly contradictory  of  Deut.  xxxii.  39,  "  I  am  he, 
and  there  is  no  God  with  mc."  Here  Jehovah  him- 
self expressly  denies  having  another  real  God  with 
him  in  the  universe,  for  he  is  often  said  to  have  had 
fictitious  gods  with  him,  and,  therefore,  Jehovah's 
denial,  in  this  verse,  must  be  referred  and  confined  to 
real  gods.  Psalm  Ixxxii.  1  :  "  God  standeth  in  the 
congregation  of  the  mighty,  he  judgeth  among  the 
gods."  He  then  addressed  himself  to  those  nomi- 
nal gods  of  Israel,  among  whom  he  stood,  "  I  said,  ye 
are  gods,''^  (inverse  6).  But  we  firmly  believe  that 
John,  an  inspired  writer,  could  not  utter  any  thing 
that  might  contradict  the  express  declaration  of  Je- 
hovah, thouofh  the  Editor  and  others,  from  a  mis- 
taken  notion,  ascribe  this  contradiction  to  the  Evan- 
gelist. 6thiy,  They  thus  render  the  last  sentence  of 
the  verse,  "  the  word  was  God,"  without  the  indef- 
inite article  "a"  before  "God,"  while  they  translate 
Exod.  vii.  1,  "  I  have  made  thee  (Moses)  a  god  to 
Pharoah,"  though  in  the  original  Hebrew,  there 
stands  onlv  the   word   CD^nSkV  or  "God,"   without 


■! 


il.  ! 


23H 


the  indefinite  article  "  a"  before  it.  If  regard  for 
the  divine  unity  induced  them  to  add  the  article  "a" 
in  the  verse  of  Exodus,  "a  God  to  Pharoah,"  why 
did  not  the  same  regard,  as  well  as  a  desire  of  con- 
sistency, suggest  to  them  to  add  the  article  *' a" 
in  John  i.  1,  "  the  word  was  a  God"?  We  may, 
however,  easily  account  for  this  inconsistency.  The 
term  "  God,"  in  Exodus,  is  applied  to  Moses,  the  no- 
tion of  whose  deity  they  abhor  ;  but  as  they  meant 
to  refer  the  same  term,  in  Jolm  i.  1,  to  Jesus,  (whose 
deity  they  are  induced  by  their  education  to  sup- 
port,) they  leave  the  word  "God"  here,  without  the 
article  "a,"  and  carefully  write  it  with  a  capital  G. 
Lastly,  If  eternity  be  understood  by  the  phrase  "  In 
the  beginning,"  in  John  i.  1,  and  Jesus  Christ  be  lit- 
erally understood  by  the  "  word,"  then  we  shall  not 
only  be  compelled  to  receive  Christ  as  an  eternal 
being,  but  also  his  apostles;  since  Luke  (chap.  i.  2,) 
speaks  of  himself  and  his  fellow-disciples,  as  "eye- 
witnesses and  ministers  of  the  word  from  the  begin- 
ning." 

Thirdly,  I  shall  now  quote  the  interpretation  of 
this  passage,  by  searchers  after  truth,  who  have  been 
enabled  to  overcome  their  early-acquired  prejudices. 
See  Improved  Version,  for  which  the  Christian  world 
is  indebted  to  its  eminently-learned  authors. 

"  The  Word']  'Jesus  is  so  called  becnuse  God  re- 
vealed himself  or  his  word  by  him.'  Newcome. 
The  same  title  is  given  to  Christ,  Luke  i.  2.  For 
the  same  reason  he  is  called  the  Word  of  life,  1  John 
i.  1,  which  passage  is  so  clear  and  useful  a  comment 
upon  the  proem  to  the  gospel,  that  it  maybe  proper 


239 

to  cite  the  whole  of  it.  'That  which  wsls  from  the 
beginning,  which  we  have  heard,  which  we  have 
seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  have  looked  upon,  and 
our  hands  have  handled  of  the  Word  of  life;  for  the 
Life  was  manifested,  and  we  have  seen  it,  and  bear 
witness,  and  show  unto  you,  that  eternal  Life  which 
was  with  the  Father,  and  was  manifested  unto  us,  that 

^  which  we  have  seen  and  heard,  declare  we  unto  you. 

'By  a  similar  metonymy  Christ  is  called  the  Life,  the 
Light,  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Resurrection. 
See  Cappe's  Dissert.     Vol.  1.  page  19." 

"  In  the  beginning,]  Or,  from  the  first,  i.  e.  from 
the  commencement  of  the  gospel  dispensation,  or  of 
the  niinistry  of  Christ.  This  is  the  usual  sense  of 
the  word  in  the  writings  of  this  evangelist.  John 
vi.  64,  Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning,  or  from  the 
first;  ch,  xv.  27,  *  Ye  have  been  with  me  from  the 
beginning.'  Seech,  xvi.  14,  ii.  24,  iii.  11;  also  1  John 
I.  1,  ii.  7,  8  ;  2  John  6,  7.  Nor  is  this  sense  of  the 
word  uncommon  in  other  passages  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament.    2  Thess.  ii.  13 ;   Phil.  iv.  1.^;  Luke  i.  2." 

"  The  Word  was  with  God.]  He  w  thdrew  from 
the  world  to  commune  with  God,  and  to  receive  di- 

*  *  • 

vme  mstructions  and  qualifications,  previously  to  his 
public  ministry.  As  Moses  was  with  God  in  the 
mount,  Exod.  xxxiv.  28,  so  was  Christ  in  the  wilder- 
ness, or  elsewhere,  to  be  instructed  and  disciplined 
for  his  high  and  important  oflfice.  See  Cappe,  ibid, 
p.  22." 

"  And  the  Word  was  a  God,]  'Was  God.'  New- 
come.  Jesus  received  a  commission  as  a  prophet  of 
of  the  Most    High,  and  was  invested  with  extraor- 


»li 


1^! 


W-  \ 


'r  ^1 


240 


dinary  miraculous  powers.  But  in  the  Jewish  phra- 
seology ihey  were  called  gods,  to  whom  the  word  of 
God  came.  (John  x.  35.)  So  Moses  is  declared  to 
be  a  god  to  Pharoah.  (Exod.  vii.  1.)  Some  trans- 
late the  passage,  God  was  the  Word,  q.  d.  it  was 
not  so  properly  he  that  spake  to  men  as  God  that 
spake  to  them  by  him.  Cappe,  ibid.  See  John  x. 
30,  compared  with  xvii.  8,  ii.  16,  iii.  34,  v.  23,  xii.  44. 
Crellius  conjectured  that  the  true  reading  was  ^««>v, 
the  Word  was  God's,  q.  d.  the  first  teacher  of  the 
gospel  derived  his  commission  from  God.  But  this 
conjecture,  however  plausible,  rests  upon  no  author- 
ity." 

"  Was  in  the  beginning  with  God,^  Before  he  en- 
tered upon  his  ministry  he  was  fully  instructed,  by 
intercourse  with  God,  in  the  nature  and  extent  of 
his  commission." 

"  j^ll  things  were  dtme  by  him.']  '  All  things  were 
made  by  him,  and  without  him  was  not  any 
thing  made  that  was  made.'  Newcome;  who  ex- 
plains it  of  the  creation  of  the  visible,  material  work! 
by  Christ,  as  the  agent  and  instrument  of  God.  Sec 
his  notes  on  ver.  3  and  10.  But  this  is  a  sense 
which  the  word  eyeiezn  will  not  admit.  Pnofica  occurs 
upwards  of  seven  hundred  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, but  never  in  the  sense  of  create.  It  signifies, 
in  this  gospel,  where  it  occuis  fifty-three  times,  to 
be,  to  come,  to  become,  to  come  to  pass  ;  also,  to  be 
done  or  transacted,  ch.  xv.  7,  xix.  36.  It  has  the 
latter  sense.  Matt.  v.  18,  vi.  8,  xxi.  42,  xxvi.  6.  All 
things  in  the  Christian  dispensation  were  done  by 
Christ,  i.  e.  by  his  authoritv.  and  accordins:  to  his  di- 


241 

rection;  and  in  the  ministry  committed  to  his  apos- 
tles nothing  has  been  done  without  his  warrant. 
See  John  xv.  4,  5,  '  Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing.' 
Compare  vers.  7,  10,  16;  John  xvii.  8;  Col.  i.  16,  17. 
Cappe,  ibid." 

Verse  14:  "Nevertheless,  the  Word  was  flesh." 
"'  Though  this  first  preacher  of  the  gospel  was  hon- 
ored with  such  signal  tokens  of  divine  confidence 
and  favor,  thouorh  he  was  invested  with  so  hio-h  an 
office,  he  was,  nevertheless,  a  mortal  man,''  Cappe. 
In  this  sense  the  word  flesh  is  used  in  the  preceding 
verse.  'Flesh,'  says  Mr.  Lindsey,  Sequel  to  the 
Apology,  page  136,  'is  frequently  put  for  man,"" — 
Psalm  Ixv.  2  ;  Rom.  iii.  20.  But  it  frequently  and 
peculiarly  stands  for  man  as  mortal,  subject  to  in- 
firmities and  sufferings  ;  and  as  such,  is  particularly 
appropriated  to  Christ  here,  and  in  other  places.  1 
Tim.  iii.  16;  Rom.  i.  3,  ix.  5;  1  Pet.  iii.  18,"^  iv.  1. 
0  loyoi  6ag^  eyeitjo,  the  Word  was  flesh,  not  be- 
came flesh,  which  is  Newcome's  translation,  or,  was 
made  flesh,  which  is  the  common  version.  The  most 
usual  meaning  of  ynouut,  is  to  be.  In  tliis  sense  f;fif7o 
is  used  in  this  chapter,  ver.  6  ;  also  in  Luke  xxiv 
19.  The  things  concerning  Jesus  of  Nazareth^ 
05  eyeveio,  who  Was,  not  who  became  a  prophet.  See 
Cappe,  p.  86 ;  and   Socinus  In  loc." 

Now  my  readers  may  judge  which  of  these  inter- 
pretations of  John  i.  1,  is  consistent  with  scriptural 
authority  and  conformable  to  the  human  understand- 

Tlie  Kdifor  denies,  positivclj,  the  charge  of  ad- 
mittiiiii;  tl)ree  Gods,  thougii  he  is  in  the  practice  of 

31 


!r  I 


i  ■  J 


h\ 


i 


■;j«; 


r?     V 


!4 


f  t 


1 
t 


^ 


v» 


c 


•242 

worshiping  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  and  God 
the  Holy  Ghost.  1  could  wish  to  know  what  he 
would  say,  when  a  Hindoo  also  would  deny  Polythe- 
ism on  the  same  principle,  that  if  three  separate  per- 
sons be  admitted  to  make  one  God,  and  those  that 
adore  them  be  esteemed  as  worshippers  of  one 
God,  what  objection  could  be  advanced,  justly,  to 
the  oneness  of  three  hundred  and  thirty-three  mil- 
lion of  persons  in  the  Deity,  and  to  their  worship  in 
different  emblems  ?  For,  oneness  of  three  or  of  thirty 
millions  of  separate  persons  is  equally  impossible,  ac- 
cording to  human  experience,  and  equally  support- 
able  by  mystery  alone. 

The  second  passage  of  John,  quoted  by  the  Ldi- 
tor,  which  I    have  not  yet  noticed,  is  John  xvi.^  30, 
"  Now  are  we  sure  that  thou  knowest  all  things."     I 
admit   that  Jesus  knows  all  things   concerning  his 
ministry  and   the  execution  of  final  judgment,   but 
not  those  that  bear  no  relation  to  either  of  them,  as 
I    noticed    in    pages   99,    162,  and    181,    since   the 
phrase  "  all  things,"  is  very  often  used  in  a  definite 
sense,  both  in  the   Old  and    New   Testaments.     In 
Joshua  i.  17,  when  the  people  said,  "  We   hearken- 
ed to  Moses  in  all  things,"  they    m  eant,  of  course, 
thiii<rs  with    regard   to   the  divine  commandments. 
So,  b  Matt.  xvii.  11,  Elias  is  said  to  have  «  restored 
all  things,"  that  is,  all  things  concerning  his  office  as 
the  forerunner  of  the  Messiah.     In    Mark   xui.  23, 
Jesus  said  to  his  disciples,  "  I  have  foretold  you  all 
things,"  of  course   what  respected   their  salvation. 
Eph.  vi.  21:    "Tychicus,  a    beloved    brother,   and 
faithful   minister  in  the  Lord,  shall  make  known   «> 


1 


243 

you  all  things,''  of  course  belonging  to  their  salva- 
tion. Besides,  the  scriptures  inform  us,  that  those 
who  devote  themselves  to  the  contemplation  of  the 
Deity  are  endued  with  the  free  gift  of  knowing  all 
things  ;  but  from  this  circumstance  they  are  not 
considered  to  be  elevated  to  the  nature  of  God,  nor 
numbered  as  persons  of  the  Godhead.  Prov.  xxviii. 
5 :  '*They  that  seek  the  Lord,  understand  all  things,'' 
2  Tim.  ii.  7 :  "  And  the  Lord  give  thee  understand- 
ing in  all  things:'  2  Sam.  xiv.  20  :  "  And  my  Lord 
is  wise,  according  to  the  wisdom  of  an  angel  of  God, 
to  know  all  things  that  are  in  the  earth." 

The  Editor  quotes  Paul,  (page  598,)  "God  our 
Saviour,"  and  I  Peter,  "The  righteousness  of  God 
and  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,"  and  also  Jude,  [25,] 
"To  the  only  wise  God  our  Saviour."  He  intends, 
perhaps,  to  shew,  that  as  both  God  and  Jesus  are 
styled  "Saviours,"  consequently  Jesus  is  God. — I 
have  fully  noticed  that  several  others,  beside  Jesus, 
were,  like  him,  appointed  by  God  to  save  people 
from  time  to  time,  and  named  Saviours  in  the  scrip- 
tures;  but  that  the  use  of  this  appellation  does  not 
serve  to  prove  the  deity  of  any  of  them.    Vide  pages 

56  and  59. 

The  Editor  expresses  his  despite  of  Hindoo  poly- 
theism, triumphing  in  his  own  pure  profession.  I 
wonder  how  it  could  escape  the  notice  of  the  Edi- 
tor, that  the  doctrine  of  plurality  in  unity  maintained 
by  him,  and  that  professed  by  Hindoos,  stand  on  the 
same  footing,  since  the  Editor,  as  well  as  the  Hin- 
doos, firmly  declares  the  unity  of  God,  while  at  the 
same  time  both  acknowleds^e  the  plurality  oi  person.^ 


^t    V 


t 


i  #i 


^  '^^ 


i 


V  V 


{ri ., 


u-«  > 


i> 


V 


•■i 


■1 


h 


^J 


II' 


1 


•^l 


■ 


244 

under  the  same  Godhead,  although  they  ditl'er  from 
each  other  in  the  exact  numl>er.  The  following 
passage  quoted  by  the  Editor,  "  the  gods  who  have 
not  made  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  shall  perish 
from  the  earthy  and  from  under  these  heavens,"  is 
equally  applicable  to  several  of  the  divine  persons  of 
both  parties. 

In  answer  to  the  Editors  query,  Where  does  the 
unity  of  mankind  exist?  1  entreat  to  be  allowed  to 
ask  the  Editor,  where  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  ex- 
ists ?  If  he  says,  that  it  is  one  divine  nature  that  ex- 
ists between  the  three  sacred  persons,  I  answer,  that 
the  unity  of  mankind  is  one  human  nature,  and  exists 
between  so  many  individual  persons. 

In  answer  to  his  question.  When  were  all  man- 
kind one  even  in  design  and  will?  I  shall  say  that 
mankind  has  always  been  one,  and  shall  be  one  even 
in  will  and  design,  in  the  glorious  and  prosperous 
reign  of  Clirist  ;  and  that  present  difference  in  will 
and  design,  or  in  rank  and  situation  among  its  per- 
sons, does  not  preclude  them  from  unity  of  nature, 
as  the  Editor  himself  admits  that  "  one  equal  in  na- 
ture to  another  may  yet  be  subordinate  in  office." 
Besides,  we  find  that  the  will  of  God  the  Father 
was  sometimes  at  variance  with  that  of  God  the 
Son.  Matt.  xxvi.  39:  "O  my  Father,  if  it  be  possi- 
ble, let  this  cup  pass  from  me  ;  nevertheless,  not  as 
I  will,  but  as  thou  wiltr  Mark  xiv.  36  :  "  And  he 
(Jesus)  said,  Abba  Father,  all  things  are  possible 
unto  thee  ;  take  aivay  this  cup  from  me  ;  nevertheless, 
not  what  I will^  but  what  thou  wilt." 

The  Editor  appeals  to  common  .^ense,  saving,  that 


245 

^•she  sees  around  her  every  day,"  that  one  man 
"equal  in  nature  to  another  is  yet  subordinate  in 
office."  She  sees  so  indeed  ;  but  when  she  sees  one 
man  equal  in  nature  to  another,  she  reckons  them 
two  men,  whether  one  is  subordinate  in  office  to  the 
other  or  not.  To  this  part  of  the  evidence,  1  beg 
the  Editor  will  pay  some  attention.  It  is  indeed  as- 
tonishing, that,  in  all  his  illustrations,  the  Editor 
brings  the  Godhead  to  a  level  with  any  orenus,  includ- 
ing  various  species  under  it,  but  feels  offended  if  any 
one  should  observe  this  fact  to  him. 

The  Editor  says,  (page  601,)  "Nor  is  it  true   that 
it  was    the  constant  practice  of  the  Saviour  to  pray 
to  the  Father  for  the  power  of  working  miracles; 
for  he  never  did  them  in  his  Father's  name,  as  was 
the  invariable  practice  of  the  ancient  prophets."     In 
reply  to  this,  I  only  refer  the  Editor  to  John  xi.  41, 
to   Mark  viii.  6,   where  we  find   Jesus  had  actually 
prayed  to  the  Father  in  raising  the  dead,  and  break- 
ing   the   bread  ;    and  especially   to  John   xi.  42,  in 
which  Jesus,  by  saying  "  thou   hearest  me  always,'" 
avows  that,  during  the  whole  period  of  his  executing 
the  divine  commission,  God  heard  his   supplications, 
though  in  several   instances  of  performing  miracles, 
he  had  not  used  verbally  the  name  of  God,  in  imita- 
tation  of  the  practice  of  some  of  the  ancient  proph- 
ets.    See  2  Kings  v.  27,  in  which  Elisha  is  said  to 
have  made  Gehazi  a  leper,  without  verbal  supplica- 
tion to  God;  and  in  ch.   ii.    10,  Elijah   bestowed  on 
Elisha    his    power  of   performing  miracles,  without 
praying  verbally  to  the  Most  High.      As  to  the  Edi- 
tor's assertion,  that  "he  never  did  them  (miracles) 


I 


s 


1.' 


14. 


J-     , 


i 


J 


i 


l>    .,..; 


1 


t     '» 


!|i     \ 


\ 


4 

J 


24G 

in  his  Father's  name/'  I  again  refer  him  to  John  x. 
25,  "  The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they 
bear  witness  of  me."     Ver.  43 :  "  I  am  come  in  my 
Father's  name,  and  yc  receive   me   not ;  if  another 
shall  come    in  his  own  name,  him  je  will  receive." 
Here  Jesus  rests  his  divine  commission  on  the  name 
of  God,  and  rejects  the  claims  of  any  one  who  comes 
in  his  own  name.     He  certainly  sent  his  disciples  to 
work  miracles  in  his  own  name,  as  the  Messiah  sent 
from  God,  that  his  apostles  might  procure   faith   in 
him  from  Jews  and   Gentiles,  whereby  they   both 
might  have  their  access  to  God  through  him.*  Matt. 
X.  40 — 42:  "He  that  receiveth   you   receiveth  me; 
and  he  that  receiveth  me  receiveth  him  that  sent  me. 
He  that  receiveth  a  prophet  in  the  name  of  a  prophet 
shall  receive  a  prophet's  reward  ;  and  he  that  receiv- 
eth a  righteous  man  in  the  name  of  a  righteous  man, 
shall  receive  a  righteous  man's  reward.     And  whoso- 
ever shall  give  to  drink  unto  one  of  these  little  ones 
a  cup  of  cold  water  only  in  the  name  of  a  disciple. 
verily  I  say  unto  you,  he  shall  in  no  wise  lose  his  re- 
ward."    These  shew  evidently  that  man  should  be 
rewarded   for  any  act  that  he  may  perform   in  the 
name  of  a  disciple,  even  in  the  name  of  a  righteous 
man.     How  much  more   is  he  to  be  approved  in  the 
sight  of  God,  if  he  acts  in  the  name  of  the  Messiah 
of  the  Most  Hi^h ! 

I  do  not  wonder  at  the  idea  of  Christ's  cmpowcr- 
mg  his  apostles  to  work  miracles,  when  we  find  other 
prophets  doing  the  same  at  their  own  choice,  as  I 
have  often  noticed.  The  Editor  says,  "  If  it  be  de- 
clared in  scripture,  that  the  Father  created  all  things 


247 

by  and  for   the  Son,  it  proves  only  that  the  Son  is 
equal  to  the  Father,"  and  that  the  passages,  " '  He 
hath  given  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself,'  '  the 
first-born  of  every  creature,'  place   the  equality  of 
the  Son  with  the  Father  beyond  all  dispute."     This 
must  be  a  new  mode  of  proof,  invented  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  Trinity,  founded  on  mystery,  far  beyond 
my  understanding.     For  if  a  creature's  being  endow- 
ed with  life  by,  or  employed  as  an  instrument  in  the 
hands  of  another,  puts   them  both  on  a  footing  of 
equality,  then,  in  the  Editor's  estimation,  the  clay  is 
equal  to  the  potter;  the  rod  with  Avhich  Moses  per- 
formed his  miracles  was  equal  to  that  great  prophet; 
and   Moses  himself,  by  whom,   and  for  whom,  God 
exhibited  so  many    wonderful    works,  was  equal  to 
the  Deitv. 


CHAPTER  V. 

Remarks  on   the  Replies  to  the  Arguments  found  in 
Chapter  the  Third  of  the  Second  Appeal 

The  Editor  now  comes  (page  602)  "  to  the  last, 
and  by  far  the  easiest  part  of  his  work,"  that  of 
meeting  my  objections  to  the  seven  positions  former- 
ly advanced  in  support  of  the  deity  of  Christ.  The 
first  of  these  is,  that  Jesus  was  possessed  of  ubiquity, 
deduced  from  John  iii.  13,  "No  man  hath  ascended 
up  to  heaven,  but  he  that  came  down  from  heaven, 
even  the  Son  of  Man,  who  is  \i\  heaven."  The  ubiq- 
nity  of  Jesus  is  by  the  Editor  grounded  on  the  phrase. 


f.    f 


i    ■!• 


i' 


ii 


(~, 


^ri 


-'      I 


1^ 


V  1 


I 


248 

'•who  is  in  heaven/'  found  in  the  present  tense,  while 
Jesus  was  at  that  time  on  earth.      I  in  the  first  place 
observed  in  my  Second  Appeal,  (p.  175,)  that  this  ar- 
gument might,  perhaps,  carry  some  weight   with  it, 
were  not  the  frequent  use  of  the  present  tense  in  a 
preterite    or   future    sense    observed    in  the   sacred 
writings;  and  were  not  a  great  number  of  other  pas- 
sages to  determine  that  the  term  "  is"  in  this  instance 
must  be  understood  in  the  past  tense  ;  and  to  support 
this   assertion,   1  quoted  several   passages,  a   few  of 
which    the   Editor    has   discussed,    leaving    the  rest 
quite  unnoticed.     One  of  these  is  John  viii.  58 :  "  Je- 
sus  said   unto   them,   Verily,  verily,  J  say  unto  you. 
Before  Abraham  was,  I  am."     To  weaken  its  force, 
the  Editor  says,   "  why   must  this  declaration,  '  Be- 
fore Abraham  was,   I    am,'  be  taken  in    a   preterite 
sense  ?  Because  if  it  be  not,  our  author's  case  dies." 
No;  but  because  it  would  bear  no  sense  unless  thus 
understood,  "Before    Abraham  was,  /  ira^."     The 
Editor  further  says,  "  Did  the  Jews,  however,  under- 
stand it  thus?  So  far  from  it,  that  they  esteemed  it 
a  decided   declaration  of  Jesus's   equality  with    the 
Father,  and  took  up  stones  to  stone  him  as  a  blas- 
phemer."    The  Jews  understood  Jesus  as  declaring- 
himself  to  be    more  ancient   than  Abraham,  which 
they  first  inferred  from   his  assertion   "  Your  father 
Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day,  and  he  saw  it  and 
was  glad."     (John  viii.  56.)     But  there  is  nothing  in 
the  context   that  can  convey  the   least  idea  of  the 
Jews  having  esteemed  the  phrase  "Before  Abraham 
was,  I  am,"  a  "decided  declaration  of  Jesus's  equali- 
ty with  the  Father,"  or    of  their   having,   in  conse- 


249 

quence,  taken  up  stones  to  stone  him.     Nor  can  th<* 
circumstance  of  thc-r  attempt  to  stone  Jesus,  be  con 
sidered  as  a  proof  of  their  viewing  the  above  decla- 
ration respecting   his  priority  to  Abraham,  as  bias- 
phemy   against    God,  for  they  sought  to  slay  Jesus 
once  on  account  of  his  having  healed  a  man  on  the 
sabbath  day,  whicli   they  considered  as  a  breach  of 
thoir  law,  and  not  as    a   claim  to  equality    with   the 
Deity  ;  (John  v.  16;)  and  they  wanted  again  to  de- 
stroy Jesus  merely  from  his  affirming,  "  1  know  him^ 
for  I   am  from  him  and  he  hath  sent  me  ;    (John  vii* 
29,  30 ;)  and  finally  fro  m  motives  of  political  safety  as 
far  as    regarded    their  connexion  with  the  Romans, 
the  Jews  resolved  to  kill  him.  (John  xi.  47,  48,  5.3,) 
The  Editor  says,  that  "  Jesus  himself,  meek  and 
lowly  as  he  was,  although  he  knew  precisely  in  what 
sense  they  understood  him,  rather  chose  to  work  a 
miracle  for  his  own  safety,  than  to  deny  his  divinity.'' 
From  what  1  have  just  stated,  and   from  all  that  I 
mentioned    in  pp.    228,  203,   it    obviously   appears, 
that  neither  the  Jews  understood  his  deity  from  the 
assertion,  "  before    Abraham  was  I  am,"  nor   was  it 
usual  with  Jesus  to  correct  them  whenever  they  mis- 
took his  meaning.     The   Editor  might  further  per^ 
ceive,    m  John   v.   20,  and   its   context,  that  Jesus, 
though   charged   with  having  a   demon,  omitted  to 
correct  fully  their  mistaken  notion  ;  and  also,  m  John 
viii.  48  and  49,   that,  on  the  Jews  reproaching  him 
with  being  a  Samaritan,  and  with  being  possessed  by 
a  demon,  the    Saviour  only  denied   the  second,  and 
omitted  to  notice  the  former,  which  was  the  grossest 
charge  that    one    Jew  could  ever  prefer  against   nn- 
<»nier.  32 


ir'^ 


f 


f: 


|i 


i 


i 

I' 

in 
t 
t 

* 


1 
t 


2^)0 


The  Editor  seems  doubtful  as  to  tlie  force  of  the 
arguments  he  has  adduced  in  turning  the  above  verse 
to  his  purpose,  as  he  thous^ht  it  proj)er  to  have  re- 
course to  "  tlie  bodj  of  evidence  previously  adduc- 
ed'' in  his  attempt  to  prove  "Christ's  ubiquity;"  but 
my  readers  may  be  able  to  jrdoe,  from  a  calm  ex- 
animation  of  this  body  of  evidence,  wFiether  or  not 
it  has  any  weight  in  proof  of  the  ubiquity  of  the 
Son. 

The    Editor  now   lays  down  a  rule  for  those  in- 
stances  where  the  present  tense  is  used  in  the  scrip 
tures  for  the  past,  saying,  "  In  poetry,  and  sometimes 
in  lively  narrative,  the  present  is,  with  strict  propri- 
ety, used  for  the  past,  because  the  transaction  is  nar- 
rated as  though  passing  before  the  reader's  eyes."    I 
therefore  beg  the  Editor  to  explain,  conformably  to 
this  rule,  the  instances  1  noticed,  (Second  Appeal, 
pp.  175,  176,)  and  numerous  other  instances.     John 
xi.  8  :  "  His  discij)les  soy  unto  him,"    instead  of  said 
unto  him.      Ver.  38 :  "Jesus  come  tk  to   the  grave," 
that  is,  came  to  the  gra>  e.     Ch.  xiii.  G  :  "  Then  com- 
eih  he  to  Simon    Peter,"  that    is,  he    came  to   Simon 
Peter.     Do  these  come  under  the  denomination  of 
poetry  or  lively  narration  ?     If  not,  the  Editor's  rule 
must  fall    to  the  ground.     If  the  Editor  insists  upon 
their  being  lively  narration,  because  the  circumstanc- 
es are  "narrated  as  though  passing  before  the  read- 
er's eyes,"   how  can  we  be   prevented,  in   that  case, 
from  taking  the    assertion  in  John  iii.  1 1,  also  for  a 
lively  narration,  on  the  same  ground,  that  the  circum- 
stances are    narrated   in  the   verse    in  question   "as 
though  passing  before    the  reader's   eyes,"  although 
Tesus  had  in  reality  meant  by  present,  the  past  tense? 


251 

The  Editor  further  observes,  that  "it  is  a  didac- 
tic discourse,  on  the  clearness  and  accuracy  of  which 
depended   the  salvation  of  a  man  (Nicodemus)  who 
had  hazarded  much  in  coming  to  Jesus  for  instruc- 
tion."     It  is  true  that  Jesus,  as  the  greatest  prophet 
of  God,  (or  an  omniscient  being,  according  to  the  or- 
thodox  creed,)  thougli  well  aware  of  the  slow  appre- 
hension  of  Nicodemus,  instructed  him  in  a  language 
far  from  being  clear   and    comprehensible  to'' him, 
both  in  the  preceding  and  following  verses.     Vide 
ver.  3  :  "  Except  a  man  be  bom  again,  he  cannot  see 
the   kingdom  of  God."      Ver.  8  :  "  So  is  every  one 
that  IS  born  of  the  Spirit:'    Ver.  13  :  "  No  man  hath 
ascended  up  to  heaven  but  he   that  came  down  from 
heaven,"  <^c.     Ver.    14:  "And  as  Moses  lifted  up 
the  serimn  in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son 
of  Manie  lifted  t/y/'— foretelling  him  of  iiis  death  on 
the  cross  by   these  ambiguous  words.     Nay,  more- 
over, he,  in  his  discourse  with  the  Jews  and  the  mul- 
titude, very  often  expressed  his  ideas  in  such  a  man- 
ner, that  not  only  the  Jews,   but  his  own  disciples, 
mistook  his   meaning;    but   he  always  regulated  his 
instructions  as  he  was  guided  by  his  and  our  heaven- 
ly Father.      It  would  be,  therefore,  presumptuous  in 
us  to  lay  down  rules  for  his  conduct,  maintaining  that 
-counnon  humanity,    therefore,  demanded  that    in 
further  discourse  with  him,  no  word  should  be  used 
but  it)  it's  direct  and  proper  sensed'' 

In  answer  to  his  assertion,  "  If  then,  he  would  only 
tell  us,  how  Jesus  was  regarded  in  those  realms  of 
Ii^ht  and  truth  previously  to  his  descent  on  earth,  he 
would  himself  settle  this  point,"— I  bee:  to  refer  the 


1 


•  f 


I 


L     if 


:r: 


1^ 


'^ 


t 


-t' 


II 


s 


] 


N 


2rr2 

Editor  to  such  authority  as  no  Christian  can  ever  de- 
ny;  I  mean  1  Peter  i.  20  :  *^  Who  verily   wdis  foreor- 
datned  before  ike  foundation  of  the    worlds  but   was 
7aanifested  in  these  last  limes  for  you."     And  also  to 
2  Tim.  i.  9  :  "  Who  hath  saved  us,  and  called  us  with 
a  holy  calling,    not    according    to     our   works,    but 
according   to  his    own  purpose   and    grace,  which 
was  given  m  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the  world  began:' 
If  this  plain  explanation  fall  short  of  convincing  the 
Editor  of  the  real   sense  in  which  the  pre-existence 
of  Jesus  and  of  his  followers  was  meant,  my  endeav- 
or to  correct  his    notion  on  this  head  must  be  of  no 
use. 

In  order  to  weaken  the    force  of  the  argument  I 
founded  on  John  vi.  62,  "  The  Son  of  Man  ascend  up 
where  he  was  before,''  shewing  the  absence  of  Jesus 
from    heaven,   while    he    was    talking   to   men    on 
earth,    the    Editor    quotes     Gen.    xi.    ry,    xviii.     33, 
XXXV.  13,  in  which  Jehovah  is  stated  to  have  moved 
from  one  place  to  another,  though  possessed  of  om- 
nipresence.    But  the  Editor  overlooked,  or  thought 
it  judicious  to  omit  to   notice,  the  real   point  of  my 
argument  in  the  Second  Appeal,  which  1  now  repeat  : 
"  For  the  attribute   of  omnipresence   is  quite  incon- 
sistent with  the  human  notions  of  the  ascent  and  de- 
scent effected  by  the  Son  of  Man.'"     It  is  not  impos- 
iiible  for   the  omnipresent  God  that  he  should  mani- 
fest himself  wherever  he  chooses  without  violating 
his  omnipresence;  but   the   notion  of  occupying  two 
very  distant   places  at  one  time   by   a  son  ofmaru,  is, 
of  course,  contrary  to  the   ideas  accjuired   by  human 
experience,  imless  this  extraordinarv  circumstance  be 


2r)3 

ascribed    to  the    power  of  perforuung   miracles  be- 
stowed on  man  by  God. 

Jesus,  however,  took  every  precaution  in  wording 
his  discourse  with  Nicodemus,  by  the  use  of  the 
term  man  in  the  very  same  verse,  (13,)  thus  estab- 
lishing his  humanity;  but,  notwithstanding  this,  the 
prejudices  of  a  great  number  of  his  followers  nave 
induced  them  to  infer  his  ubiquity,  and  thereby  his. 
deity  from  the  same  verse. 

I  will  not  recur  to  the  examination  of  such  passa- 
ges as   "  who  made  all   things,"  "  who  upholds  all 
things,"  ifec.  alluded   to   here   by  the  Editor,  having 
often  noticed  them  in  the  former  part  of  this  work. 
Let  us  now  come  to  the  real  point,  and  ascertain 
whether  or  not    the   word,  in   the    original   Greek, 
which  is  rendered  "is"  in  the  English  version,  in  the' 
phrase  "who  is    in   heaven,"  actually   signifies   i\\o. 
present  tense,  as  a  candid  inquiry  into  this  very  point 
will  bring  us  to  a  satisfactory  decision  at  once.     The 
word   in    the   original  is  wr,  a   participle,  and  not  a 
verb;  and  all  that  1  said  in  my  Second  Appeal  may 
be  compressed  into  three  remarks.   In  the  first  place, 
that  the  time  of  the  participle  is  referred  to  the  time 
of  the  veib  found  in  the  sentence  ;  and  to  corroborate 
this  opinion,  I  (juoted  Bishop  Middleton's  doctrine  of 
the  Greek  Article,  Part  i.  p.  42,  Note  :  "  W^e  are  to 
refer  the  time  of  the  participle  to  the  time  of  the  act, 
&c.  implied  in  the  verb  ;  for,  past,  present  and  future, 
cannot  be  meant  otherwise  than  in  respect  of    that 
act."*  And  I  also  cited  John  i    48,  O.  xa  ei§ov  6t^  "  [ 

*  The  Editor  has  given,  in  p.  607,  a   quotation  from   Bishop  Middleton 
with  some  remarks  ol  his  own  ;  but  1  am  pe.fectly  willing  to   leave  it  to  the 
discerning   reader  to   judge    whether    it   conoborates   my  opinion  or  makp« 
agaiiiHt  if.  '       ^  "iflKr 


:f: 


<      I 


1  f 


1 


S 


1 


jxj 


s 


234 

saw  thee  when  thou  wast;"  hterall),  ^-1  saw  thee 
being,"  in  wfiich  the  present  participle  imphes  the 
past  in  correspondence  with  the  verb  titioi^  or  "  I 
saw,"  found  in  the  same  verse.  I  now  also  be«-  the 
attention  of  the  Editor  to  the  common  usaffe  of  al- 
most  all  the  languages  that  have  the  use  of  a  pres- 
ent participle,  in  which  he  will  find  the  participle 
generally  referriiig  to  the  time  of  the  verb  related 
to  it.  In  English,  for  example,  in  the  following 
phrase,  "  Being  ill,  I  could  not  call  upon  you,"  the 
time  of  the  present  participle  "being"  refers,  I 
presume,  to  the  verb  ••  could  not  call"  implying  the 
past  tense. 

In  the  second  place,  1  quoted  Lev  it,  vii.  33,  xiv. 
47,  in  which  the  present  participle  is  accompa- 
nied with  the  deiinite  article,  observing,  that  "these 
present  participles  are  referred  to  a  time  present 
with  respect  to  the  act  of  the  verbs  connected  with 
them,  but  future,  with  respect  to  the  command  of 
God" — that  is,  when  the  defmite  article  is  prefixed 
in  Greek  to  a  present  participle,  it  has  reference  to 
the  verb  connected  with  it  in  an  indefujite  manner. 
So  we  find  many  instances  in  the  New  Testament 
similar  to  those  quoted  from  Leviticus.  In  the  third 
place,  I  said,  "  Moreover,  we  frequently  find  the 
present  participle  used  in  a  past  tense,  even  without 
reference  to  the  time  of  the  verb.  John  ix.  25: 
Tv(f^oi  wr  agzL  fJ3.£.Tu>,  "  Being  blind,  now  I  sec;"  that 
IS,  "  Having  been  blind,  now   1  see." 

The  Editor,  omitting  to  notice  the  second  and 
third  arguments  adduced  by  me,  makes  remarks  only 
on  the  first,  saying,  that  ••  were  this  criticism"  ("  bc- 


255 

ing  in  heaven,"  instead  of  "  is  in  heaven")  perfectly 
correct,  it  would  not  be  of  the  least  service   to  our 
author,  as,  he  being  in  heaven,  is  precisely  the  same 
as  he  who  is  in  heaven."— I  positively  object  to  the 
accuracy  of    this   assei'tion  of  the    Editor;  for  the 
verb  "  is,"  g-nerally  affirms  an  act  or  a  state  at  the 
time  present  when  spoken  ;  but  the  present  partici- 
ple iov,  or  "  being,"  even  when  preceded  by  the  defi 
nite    article   o,    or   "the,"    implies   time   indefinitely, 
though  the   article  6  is  often  rendered  bv  a  relative 
pronoun  "  who"  or  "  which,"  and  the  participle  by  a 
verb,  for  the  sake  of  elegance  in  English  composi- 
tion.    1  beg  to  refer  the    Editor  first  to  those  iextf, 
quoted  in  my  Second    Appeal.     Levit.   vii.   33:    O 

7igfj6(pegiov :,vio)  e6cai  6  ^gax^oyv  6  d^Voc:,    a  The  offerincr 

(person)  for  him  shall  be  the  right  shoulder."  Al- 
though the  participle  "  ofiTering'^s  found  here  in  the 
present  tense,  yet  it  indisputably  implies,  that  at  any 
tmie  in  future  in  which  the  o/Tering  may  be  made, 
"the  ofFerer  shall  be  entitled  to  the  right  shoulder." 

Lev.  xiv.    47:    O   ecf^toi-^.TXvvu  za  tfiazia  avzov    "The 

oating  (person)  shall  wash  his  clothes."     The  word 
"eating,"  though  found  here  in  the  present  participle, 
preceded    by  the   definite  Greek  article  o,   signifies 
any  part  of  the  future  m  which  the  act  of  eating  shall 
take  place.      The  phrase,  ''the  eating,'^  (person,)  is 
rendered  in  the  English  version,   "he    that  eateth," 
conformably  to  the  idiom  of  the   English  language'; 
but  this  change  of  construction  does  not  produce  any 
change  in  the  real  meaning  conveyed  bv  the  original 
Greek.     As  this  phrase,  "  he  that  eats,"  bears  no  al- 
lusion to  the  support  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinitv. 


'■} 


t  i 


^ 


f 


1- 


if!" 


•i. 


N 


t  f 


I 


no  one  will,  J  presume,  scruple  to  interpret  it  in  its 
original  sense  ;  that  is,  he  who  eats  at  anj  time  fu- 
ture with  respect  to  the  commandment  of  God,  shall 
wash  his   clothes. 

Secondly,  1  refer  the   Editor  to  the   passages  he 
quoted  in  p.  608,  to  save  me  the  trouble  of  selecting 
them.     John  iii.  4  :  "  How  can  a  man  be  born  when 
he  is    okir  literally,  "  being  old;"  that  is,   at    any 
pomt  of  time,  no  man  being  old  can  be   born.      Ver. 
15:  "That  no  man  believing  on  him  should  perish;" 
that  IS,  no  one  who  may  be  induced  to  believe  Jesus 
at  any  time,  even  up  to  the  last  day,  should  perish. 
Ver.  18:  "He  not  believing  is  condemned  already;" 
that  is,  he  who  rejects  me  at  any  time,  is  condemned 
already  in  the  divine  decree.     Ver.  20:  "Every  one 
doing  evil    hateth   light,"  at  any   time  whatsoever. 
Ver.  29:  "  He  having  the  bride  is  the  bridegroom," 
at  any  period  of  time.      Ver.  31  :  "He  being  of  the 
earth  is  earthly,"  at  any  period  of  time.     Again,  ch. 
V.  3:  "  In  these  lay  a  great  multitude  of  folk  impo- 
tent," &c.     In  the  original  Greek,  the  verb  "  to  lie," 
is  in  the  imperfect  tense,  and  consequently  the  par- 
ticiple may  be  thus  rendered,   "  Who  were  impotent 
up  to  that  time."     Ver.  5  :  "  And  a  certain  man  was 
there  who  had   an  infirmity  thirty  and  eight  years." 
In  this  verse  the  participle  is  not  preceded  by  the  ar- 
ticle :   this,  however,  signifies  that  a  certain  man  had 
anmfirmity  when  he  was  present  at  the  pool— not  at 
the  time  when  St.  John  narrated  this  circumstance. 
But  with  a  view  to  expose   my  argument  to  ridicule, 
the  Editor  puts  his  own  words  into  my  mouth,  sav- 
ing, (p.  ()08,)  "  In  this  Chaf)ter  v.  4,  we  havc>.  '  h.)w 


I 


257 


can  a  man  be  born  when  he  is  old  T  literally,  '  beinff 
old,'  on  our  authors  plan,  '  having  been  old,  and  now 
not  bemg  so;'"  and  so  on  in  all   the    above-stated 
verses.     But  1  wonder  how  he  could  mistake  what 
I  have  advanced  in  my  Second  Appeal,  in  explanation 
of  a  present  participle  preceded  by  the  article  6  m 
the  following  words  :   "The  offering  (person)  for  him 
shall   be  the   right  shoulder  :— the  eating   (person) 
shall   wash  his  clothes.      These  present  participles 
are  referred   to  a  time  present  with  respect  to  the 
act  of  the   verbs  connected   with  them,   but  future 
with  respect  to  the  command  of  God."     Now   my 
reader  may  judge  whether  I  confined  the    meaning 
of  a  present  participle  to  the  past  tense,  as  the  Edi- 
tor, no  doubt  inadvertently,  misrepresents  my  argu- 
ments. 

Thirdly,  I  beg  to  refer  the  Editor  to  the  translation 
of  that  verse  by  the  celebrated  Dr.  Campbell :  "For 
none  ascendeth  into  heaven,  but  he  who  descended 
from  heaven,  the  Son  of  Man,  whose  abode  is  in  heav- 
en;" m  which  the  sense  of  the  participle  is  referred 
to  an  indefinite  time  ;  for  a  person  whose  abode  is  in 
London,  may  have  his  temporary  residence  in  Pari^:. 

Fourthly,  I  beg  also  to  refer  to  the  explanation  of 
the  article  d  before  a  participle,  given  by  Parkhurst : 
'*  XI.  With  a  participle  it  may  generally  be  render- 
ed by  ivho,  that,  which,  and  the  participle  as  a  verb. 
Thus  1  John  ii.  4,  0  Xeyujv^  he  who  saith,  i.  e.  the 
(person)  saying.     John  i.  18,  6  an-  who  is  or  was,'' 

As  to  the  assertion  of  the  Editor,  that  were  the 
time  of  the  participle  "  being,"  found  in  the   phrase 
"  being  In  heaven,"  referred  to  the  verb  "  to  ascend 
'■  .33 


3'" 


M 


) 


l! 


■V  . 


~> 


I- 


258 


up  to  heaven,''  it  would  completely  prove  the  ubiqui- 
ty of  Christ,  or  involve  perfect  absurdity;  I  presume 
there  would  be  neither  of  these  difficulties,  in  the 
event  of  the   participle  being  referred   to  tlie  verb 
mentioned  in  the  verse ;  for,  one's  beinsf  in  heaven, 
or  having  his  abode   in  heaven,  does  not  render  his 
ascent    to   heaven  impossible,   nor   does    it    tend    to 
prove  his  deity.     Let  us  apply  these  circumstances 
as  they  stand   literally   to  Moses  and   Elias,  who  de- 
scended from  their  heavenly  abode,  and    appeared 
with  Jesus  Christ  to  his  apostles,  (Matt.  xvii.  3,)  and 
again  ascended,  would  it  prove  their  ubiquity,  or  in- 
volve absurdity  ?     But  is  there  any   thing  more  ab- 
surd than  an  attempt  to  prove  the  ubiquity  of  a  son 
of   man    capable  of   occupying  only  a  certain  small 
space  on  earth  ? 

In  reply  to  his  assertion,  that  "  when  John  wishes 
to  describe  a  past  state  of  action  or  being,  he  choos- 
es some  past  participle,"  I  only  beg  to  remind  him. 
that  in  the  Greek  language  there  is  no  past  or  future 
participle  for  the  verb  «."«,  to  be^  and,  consequently, 
the  present  participle  is  used  for  those  tenses  under 
the  specific  rules.* 

*  The  true  explanation  of  the  verse  is  griven  in  the  Improved 
Version,  as  follows:  "Now  no  man  hath  ascended  up  to  heaven, 
but  he  who  came  down  from  heaven,  f  even  the  Son  of  Man,  [who 
is  in  heaven.]"! 

t  "He  who  came  down  from  heaven.'\  This  clause  is  correlative  to  the 
preceding.  If  the  former  is  to  be  understood  of  a  local  ascent,  the  latter 
must  be  interpreted  of  a  local  descent.  But  if  the  former  clause  is  to  be 
understood  figuraUvely,  as  Raphelius  and  Doddridge  explain  it,  the  iMter 
ought  m  all  reason  to  be  interpreted  figuratively  likewise.  If  '  to  ascend 
into  he.iven,'  signifies  to  become  acquainted  with  the  truths  of  God,  '  de- 
scend from  heaven,'  is  to  bring  clown,  and  to  discover  those  truths  to  the 
world.  And  this  text  clearly  exphmis  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  wherever  it 
occurs  in  this  evangelist.  '  Coming  down  from  heaven,'  means  coming  from 
God,  (see  ver.  2,)  as  Nicodemus  expressed  it,  wh«  did  not  understand  this  of 
a  local  descent,  but  of  a  divine  commission.  So  Christ  interprets  it  ver.  17  Sn  " 

:  "  Who  75    m   heaven.]     This  clause    is   wanting  in    some  of  the  best 


259 

As  to  the  second  passage  which  he  quoted  to  de 
monstrate  the  ubiquity  of  Jesus,  (Matt,  xviii.  20,  "  For 
where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them,")  1  observ- 
ed in  my  Second  Appeal,  "  Is  it  not  evident  that  the 
Saviour  meant  here,  by  being  in  the  midst  of  two  or 
three  of  his  disciples,  his  guidance  of  them  when  join- 
ed in  searching  for  the  truth,  without  preferring  any 
claim  to  ubiquity  ?  We  find  similar  expressions  of  the 
scriptures  wherein  the  guidance  of  the  prophets  of 
God  is  meant  by  words  that  would  imply  tlieir  pres- 
ence. Luke  xvi.  29  :  '  Abraham  said  unto  him,  They 
have  Moses  and  the  prophets,  let  them  hear  them.' 
No  one  will  suppose  that  this  expression  is  intended 
to  signify  that  the  Jews  actually  had  Moses  and  the 
prophets  in  person  among  them,  or  that  they  could 
hear  them  speak,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  words; 
nor  can  any  one  deduce  the  omnipresence  of  Moses 
and  the  prophets  from  such  expressions." 

The  Editor,  to  avoid  entering  into  the  main  ar- 
gument, puts  the  following  questions,  to  which  1 
shall  now  reply.  1st.  "  If  Christ  guided  them,  must 
he  not  have  been  with  them  for  that  purpose  ?"  Yes, 
he  has  been  with  them  in  the  same  manner  as  Mo- 
ses  and  the  prophets  have  been  with  the  Israelites, 
as  IS  evident  from  the  above-quoted  passage  of 
Luke,  as  well  as  from  another  which  I  shall  now  cite. 
1  John  lii.  24  :  "  And  he  that  keepeth  his  command- 
ments dwelleth  in  liiiii,  and  he  in  him:  and  hereby  we 
know  that  he  abideth  in  us,  by  the  spirit  which  he  hath 
given  us:'     2dly.     '^  Jf   there   were    only    two  such 

copies.     If  its  authenticity  is  allowed,  it  is  to  be  understood  of  the  knowl- 
edge which  Christ  possessed  of  the  Father's  will.     See  John  i.  18." 


^1' 


V 


H^ 


1     . 


«  I 


'    t 


\ 


260 

Jittle  companies  searching  for  the  truth  at  the  same 
moment,   must    he   not    have    possessed  ubiquity    to 
guide   them   both?"     1  reply   by    two    other   ques- 
tions.     If  the   Jews    of  Gahlee   and   of   Jerusalem 
"  have  Moses  and  the  Prophets"  at  the  same  time  for 
their  guidance,  are  Moses   and  the    Prophets  to  be 
supposed  to  have  been  possessed  of  ubiquity?     Af- 
ter Ehjah  went  up  to   heaven,  (2  Kings  ii.    11,)  and 
his  spirit   was  seen  resting  on  Elisha,  who  remained 
on  earth,  (Ver.  15,)  does  the  circumstance  of   Eh- 
jah's    bemg   in    heaven,   and  being  with  his  servant 
Eh'sha  on  earth  in  spirit  at  the  same  time,  prove  the 
ubiquity    of  Ehjah?     3dly.      The   Editor  asks,  "If 
he  (Jesus)  was  with  Christians  to  guide  them,  has  he 
left  them  now  ?"     I  reply,  neither  Jesus  nor  Moses 
and  the  Prophets  have  now  forsaken  those  that  sin- 
cerely search  into  truth,  and  are  not  fettered  with 
early-acquired  human  opinions.     4th.     "  How   then, 
can  he  be  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever?" 
My  reply  is,  he  has  been  the  same  in  like  manner  as 
David  has  been,  in  "keeping  the  law  continually /or- 
ever  and  ever:'     (Psalm  cxix.  44.)     5th.     "  Does  our 
author  need  to  be  told  that  this  meant  the  writings 
of  Moses  and  the   Prophets?"    I  reply,  that  this  ex- 
pression  means   their  words    preserved    forever  by 
means  of  writing  as  the  statutes  of  God.     Psalm  cxix. 
152:  "Concerning  thy  testimonies,  I  have  known  of 
old  that   thou   hast  founded    tJiem  forever."     Ver. 
89:     "Forever,  O   Lord,   thy     word   is   settled    in 
heaven."    And  Dcut.  xxxii.  1,  Moses  exclaims,  "  Give 
ear,  O  ye   heavens,  and  I   will   speak,   and   hear,  O 
earth,  the    words  of  my  mouth  ;   mv   doctrine  shall 


261 

drop  as  the  rain,  my  speech  shall  distil  as  the  dew," 
&c.     6th.     "  Did  Jesus  mean  that  they  had  his  writ- 
ings with  them?"  I  reply,  he  meant,  of  course,  that 
tiiey  had  his  lowly  spirit,  and  his  words,  which  were 
afterwards  published  and  preserved  in  writing.     7th 
"  Where  were  the  writings  of  Jesus  at  that^ime  ?" 
I  said  not  a  word  of  his  writings  in   my  Second  Ap- 
peal.     Why  the  Editor  puts    this   question  to  me,  I 
know  not.     It  is,  however,  evident,  that  Jesus  him- 
self, while  on  earth,  like  other  prophets  of  God,  nev- 
er omitted  to  express   his  doctrines  and  precepts, 
which  have  been  handed  down  in  writing  up  to  thi. 
day. 

SECOND    POSITION. 

The  Editor  quoted  Matt.  xi.  27,  "  No  man  knovv- 
eth  the  Son,   but  the  Father;  neither  knoweth  any 
man  the  Fatiier,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoev- 
er the  Son  will  reveal   him,"to  shew  that   Jesus   as- 
cnbes  to  himself  a  knowledge  and  an  incomprehensi- 
bility of  nature  equal  to  that  of  God.     I  consequent- 
ly asked  the  Editor  in  ray  Second  Appeal,  "If  he,  by 
the    term   'incomprehensible,'    understands    a   total 
mipossibility  of   being  comprehended  in  any  decree 
or  only   tfie  impossibility   of  attaining  to  a   perfect 
knowledge  of  God?"  If  tlie  former,  we  must  be  un- 
der  the  necessity   of  denying  such  a  total   incompre- 
hensibility of  the  God/iead  ;  for  the  very  passa-e  cit- 
ed  by  the  Editor  declares  God  to  be  comprehensible 
not  to  the  Son  alone,  but  also  to  everyone  who  should 
receive  revelation  from  the  Son;  and  in  Jolin  xvi.  16 
17.  Jesus  ascribes  to  his  disciples  a  knowledge  of  the 


N    # 


P 


t» 


•\ 


i  : 


'2&2 

Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Editor  considers  one  of  tlie 
persons  of   the  Godhead,  possessed  of  the  same  na- 
ture with  God.      But  if  the    Editor  understands   by 
the  passage  he  has   quoted,  the   incomprehensibility 
of  the  real  nature  of  the  Godhead,  I  adnut  the  po- 
sition, but  deny  his  inference  that  such  an  incompre- 
liensibility  proves  the  nature  of  the  object  to  be  di- 
vine, as  being   pecuh'ar  to  God  alone,  for  it  appears 
evident  that  a  knowledge  of  the  real  nature  even  of 
a  common  leaf,  or  a  visible  star,  surpasses  human  com- 
prehension.      The    Editor,   although   he   tilled   one 
page  (610)  in  examining  that  part  of  the  reply,  yet 
made  no  direct  answer  to  the  foreiroinir  question,  but 
repeats  his  inference  from  these  passages,  "that  Je- 
sus hunself  can  comprehend  the  nature  of  the  Fath- 
er, and  that  his   own  nature  is  equally  inscrutable;" 
but   the   verse    in   question    does  not  convey  one  or 
other  of  these  positions.     As  to  the  hrst,  we  find  the 
latter  part  of   the  sentence    ("neither  knoweth  any 
man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoev- 
er the    Son  will  reveal  him")  declaring  an  exception 
to  the  general  assertion  made   in  the  former  part  of 
it;  ("neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father;")  that 
is,  the  Son,  and  those  to  whom  the  Son  reveals  God, 
were  the    only    individuals  that   knew    the  nature  of 
the  Father.      Would  not  this  exception  be  distinctly 
contrary  both  to  the  sacred  authorities,  and  to  com- 
mon sense  ;  as  the  scripture  declares  positively  that 
the  nature  of  God  is  incomprehensible  to  men  ?  Job 
xxxvi.  26:  "God  is  great,  we  know   him  not  ;"  and 
common  sense  teaches  us  every  moment,  that  if  the 
real  nature  of  the  works  of  God  is  incomprehensible 


263 

to  the   human    intellect,    how   much  more  must  the 
nature  of  God  himself  be  beyond  human  understand- 
mg!   As  to  the   second,  if   the    circumstance  of   the 
Son's  declaring  himself  (according  to  the  Editor)  to 
be  inscrutable  in  nature,   be  acknowledged  as  equal- 
izing him  with  God,  similar  declarations  by  his  apos- 
tles would  of  course  raise  them  to  the  same  footing 
of  equality  with  the  Deity.      1  John  iii.    1  :  "Inhere- 
fore  the  world  knoweth  us  not,  because  it  knew  him 
not,"  corroborated  by  John  xviii.  25,   "  O  righteous 
Father,  the  world  hath  not  known  thee,"  &:c.      It  is 
therefore,  evident,  that  neither  can  an  impossibility 
of  comprehending  God,  in  any  degree,  be   meant  by 
this  passage,  the  apostles  having  known  God  by  rev- 
elation ;  nor  can  the  comprehension  of  the   real    na- 
ture of   God    be  understood  by  it,   as  such  a  knowl- 
edge is  declared  to  be  unattainable  by  mankind.   The 
verse  in  question  must    be  thus   understood,  as  the 
meaning  evidently  is,  "that  no  one  but  the  Father  can 
fully  comprehend  the  object  and  extent  of  the  Son's 
commission,  and  no  one  but  the  Son  comprehends  the 
counsels  and  designs  of  the  Father  with    respect   to 
the    instruction  and   reformation  of  mankind.      It  is 
impossible   that   Jesus  can  be   speaking  here   of  the 
person  and    nature    of   the  Father;  for  this  he  did 
not,  and  could  not  reveal,  being  essentially  incompre- 
hensible.    Neither,  therefore,  does  he  mean  the  na- 
ture and  person  of  the  Son.      What  Christ  knew  and 
revealed  '  was  the    Father's  will ;'  corresponding  to 
this,  '  that  which  the    Father,  and  the  Father  onlv, 
knew,  was  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  Son:s  com- 
mission.'"     Improved  Vkrsiox. 


i  t 


:H 


Mi 


i 


I 


\    4 


21J4 


THIRD    POSITION. 


As  the  Editor  expressed  Ills  opinion  that  "  Jesu> 
exercised  in  an  independent  manner  the  prerogative 
of  forgiving  sin,  which  is  peculiar  to  God,"  founding 
this  opinion  upon  the  authority  of  Mark  ii.  5,  Matt. 
ix.  2,  "  Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee,"  I  inquired  in  my 
Second  Appeal,  "  Does  not  this  passage,  ('  But  when 
the  multitude  saw  it,  they  marvrlied,  and  glorified 
God  who  had  given  such  power  unto  men,'  Matt. 
ix.  8,)  convey  an  express  declaration  that  Jesus  was 
as  much  dependent  on  God  in  exercising  the  power 
of  forgiving  sins,  and  healing  the  sick,  as  the  other 
prophets  who  came  forth  from  God  before  him  ?" 
To  which  the  Editor  replies,  "  We  answer,  onlv  in 
the  opinion  of  the  multitude,  who  knew  him  not,  but 
took  him  for  a  great  prophet." 

I  feel  surprised  at  the  assertion  of  the  Editor, 
that  it  was  the  Ignorant  multitude,  who  knew  not 
the  nature  of  Jesus,  that  made  the  followinfr  declar- 
ation,  "  who  had  given  such  power  to  men;"  since  it 
is  the  Holy  Spirit  which  speaks  by  the  mouth  of 
the  evangelist  Matthew,  saying,  "  when  the  multi- 
tude saw  it,  they  marvelled,  and  glorified  God,  who 
had  given  such  power  unto  men." 

1  wonder  how  the  Editor  could  allow  his  zeal  in 
support  of  the  Trinity  so  far  to  bias  his  mind,  that 
he  has  attempted  to  weaken  the  authority  of  the 
holy  evangelist,  by  ascribing  his  words  to  the  igno- 
rant multitude  of  Jews.  I  wonder  still  more,  to  ob- 
serve, that  notwithstandlno:  the  Editor  declares  the 
apostles  and  primitive  Christians,  (whom  he  does 
not  esteem  as   persons  of   the    Godhead,  but  admits 


.1, 


265 

to  be  mere  men,)  to  have  been  possessed  of  the 
power  of  pardoning  sins  through  the  influence  of  Je- 
sus ;  yet  he  maintains  the  opinion,  that  none,  except 
Ood,  can  forgive  sins  even  through  the  gift  of  the 
t'eify  himself. 

The  Editor  says,  «  Not,  however,  in  the  opinion 
of  the  Scribes,  who  were  better  acquainted  with 
the.r  own  scriptures,  and  who,  although  they  glori- 
J.edhimnot  as  God,  could  not  restrain  themselves 
from  acknowledging  the  display  of  his  Godhead  by 
accusing  h.m  of  blasphemy  on  that  very  account." 

Ihe  Jews  were  so  ill-disposed  towards  Jesus,  that 
this  ,s  not  the  first  instance  in  which  they  sought  a 
pretence  for  destroying  him  under  the  charge  of 
blasphemy;  for  in  John  v.  16,  they   resolve  to  slay 

t?r     L"VT''''  '^  ^'  ^'''"S  'sealed  a  man 
on   the  sabbath  day,   as  /   noticed  before,  and,  in 
chapter  ,11.  ,0,   „,  they  came  to  a  determination 
under  the   cloak  of  religion,  to  kill  him  and  Lazarus' 
also,   whom  Jesus  raised    after  death,  though  they 

tr  yr?  "V""  ^"■"P''^'^  --^-^  ^'-  dead, 
^v.tho^t   offending  God   or  the  people.     And  theJ 

also  very  frequently  mistook  his  meaning.  But  Je- 
sus  often  forbore  to  ..,.1  their  charges,some  instanc- 
es of  which  I  have  already  pointed  out  in  page 
203.  As  to  Jesus's  knowledge  of  the  human  heart, 
as  far  as  ,t  respects  his  divine  commission  and  future 
judgment,  and  his  power  of  performing  miracu! 
ous  deeds,  even  sometimes  without  verbal  reference 

V.      Z'     ''''"  ""'  '■*^*="'"  *«  them  here. 
T  lie  Editor  denies  the  apostles  having  been  ,m- 


/ 


V:A 


^€ 


\ 


1 


1 


266 

pressed    with  a  belief,    that    it   was    the   Ahnighty 

Father  that  empowered  Jesus  to  forgive  sins  and  to 

perform  miracles.     I   therefore   refer  the  Editor  to 

the  very  phrase,  "  Who  had  given  such  power  unto 

men,"  and  to  Acts  v.   31,   "  Him    hath  God  exalted 

with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour, 

for  to  give  repentance  to  Israel,  and  forgiveness  of 

sins."     xiii.    38,    "  Through    this  man  (meaning  the 

Saviour)  is    preached  unto  you   the   forgiveriess  of 

sins."     Do  not  these    verses  shew,  beyond  a    doubt, 

that  Jesus  received  from  God  the  power  of  forgiving 

sins  on  sincere  repentance? 

The  Editor  makes  no  direct  answer  to  Luke  xxiii. 
34,  in  which  Jesus  prays  to  the  Father  for  the  par- 
don of  the  murder  perpetrated  by  the  Jews  upon 
him,  nor  to  Luke  xi.  4,  Matt.  vi.  14,  which  I  quoted 
in  my  Second  Appeal,  page  184.  The  Editor  al- 
ludes to  the  importance  of  the  expression,  "  That 
thy  Son  may  glorify  thee."  But  by  referring  to  the 
scriptures,  he  will  find,  that  similar  terms  are  as 
common  in  the  language  of  the  Jews,  in  their  address 
to  God,  as  any  other  expressions  of  reverence  for 
tlui  Deitv. 

FOURTH    POSITION'. 

With  a  view  to  substantiate  his  fourth  position, 
that  Almighty  power  is  claimed  by  Jesus  in  (he  most 
unequivocal  manner,  the  Editor  thus  comments  on 
the  passage,  Jolin  v.  19 — 36,  quoted  by  me  in  my 
Second  Appeal:  "Jesus,  when  persecuted  by  the 
Jews,  for  having  healed  a  man  on  the  sabbath  day, 
said,   '  Mv  Father  worketh    hitherto,  and    T    work.' 


i 


I 


\ 


267 

This  provoked  the  Jews  still  more,  because  he  had 
now  said,  that   God  was  his  Father,  making  himself 
equal  with  God."     The  Editor  adds,"T!:is  obser- 
vation  shews   us,  that  not  only  the  Jews,  but  John 
himself,  understood  Christ's  calling  God   his  Father, 
to  be  making  himself  God:'     It  would    have   been  a 
correct  translation  of  the  original  Greek,  if  the  Edi- 
tor had   said,   "  making  himself  equal    with,  or  like 
God,"  instead  of  "  making  himself  God,"  (vide  the 
original  Greek).     It  is  obvious,  that  one's  calling  an- 
other his  Father,  gives  apparent  ground  to  under- 
stand that  there  is  an  equality  of  nature  or  likeness  of 
properties  between  them,  either  in  quantity  or  quality 
of  power  in  performing  works.  But  to  know  what  kind 
of  equality  or  likeness  should  be  meant  in  Ch.  v.  18, 
we  have  luckily  before  us  the  following  texts,  in  which 
Jesus  declares,  that  his  likeness  with  God  consisted 
in  doing  what  he  saw  the  Father  do,  and  quickening 
the  dead;  avowing   repeatedly,  at    the  same  timet 
his  inferiority  to  and  dependence  on  God,  in  so  plain 
a  manner,  that  the  Jews  who  heard  him,  abstained 
from  the  measures  of  persecution  that  they  had  in- 
tended to  adopt,  although  the  Saviour  continued   to 
call  God   his  Father,  through  the  whole  of  the  re- 
maining chapter,  in  the  hearing  of  the  Jews.      Nay 
further,  from  the  whole  of  his  conduct  and  instruct 
tions,  so  impressed  were  the  Jews  with  his  depen- 
dence  upon  and  confidence  in  the  Father  as  his  God, 
that  when   he  was   hanging  on  the  cross  they  fixed 
upon  this  as  a  ground  of  taunt  and  reproach,  saving 
"  He  trusted  in  God  ;  let  him  deliver  him  now,  if  he' 
will  have  him,  for  he  said.  '  J  am   the  Son  of  God  '  " 
Matt,  xxvii.43. 


ii 


1' 


•r 


If 


X 


■'I 


) 

i 


«  ■ 


f 


1 


268 


269 


The  Editor  then  proceeds  to  say,  "  This  (charge 
of  equahtj)  Jesus  neither  denies  nor  corrects,  but 
adds,  '  The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  but  what 
he  seeth  the  Fat  lie  r  do,'  wnich  must  necessarily  be 
the  case,  if,  as  our  author  affirms,  the  Father  and  the 
Son  are  one   in  will  and  design.''     1  ask  the  Editor, 
whether  this  be  the  language  of  one  who  is  almigh-^ 
ty7     If  the  Father  and  the  Son  be  equally  almigh- 
ty, why  should  the  Son  wait  until  the  Father   acts, 
and  then  imitate  him?     If  a  subordinate  officer,  hav- 
ing been   accused  of  equalizing  himself  with    his  su- 
perior, thus  declares,  "  I  cannot  march  a  single  step 
myself,  but  where  I  see  him  march,  I  do  march," — 
would  this  be  considered  an  avowal  of  his  equality 
with  his  superior  ?     My  readers  will  be  pleased  to 
judge.      The    Editor   then  says,  that   "Jesus  adds 
further,  'For  whatever  things  he  doth,  these   also 
doth  the  Son  likewise;'  a  more  full  declaration  of 
equality  with  the  Father  cannot  be  imagined.     How 
could  the  Son  do  whatsoever  the  Father  doth,  if  he 
were  not  equal  to  him  in  power,  wisdom,  truth,  mer- 
cy?" &:c.     The  Editor  here  omits  to  quote  the  very 
next  line,  "  FOR   the    Father  loveth  the  Son,  and 
sheiceth  him  all  things  that  himself  doth,"  in   which 
the  preposition  "  for"  assigns  reasons  for  the   Son's 
doinff  what  the  Father  doth ;  i.  e.  since  the  Father 
loveth  the  Son,  and  sheweth  him  his  works,  the  Son 
is  enabled  to  do  what  he  sees  the  Father  do.     To 
the  Editor's  query,  "  What  finite  being  could  under- 
stand all  that  God  doth,  if  shewn  him  ?"  I  reply.  Di- 
vine wisdom  will  of   course   not  show  any   thing  to 
one  whom  it  has  not  previously  enabled  to  compre- 


A 


hend  it.  How  could  the  following  passages  escape 
the  memory  of  the  Editor,  when  he  put  the  ques- 
tion: Amos  iii.  7,  "Surely  the  Lord  God  willdo 
nothing,  but  revealeth  his  secret  unto  his  servants  the 
Prophets ;"  Psalm  xxv.  14,  "  The  sect^et  of  the  Lord 
is  with  them  that  fear  him,  and  he  will  shew  them  his 
covenant  ?"  Did  not  they  understand  all  that  was 
shewn  and  revealed  unto  them?  If  they  did,  were 
they,  in  consequence,  all  infinite  beings,  as  the  Editor 
argues,  from  this  circumstance,   Jesus   is  ? 

The  Editor  proceeds  to  say,  "  Jesus  adds,  '  For 
as  the  Father  quickeneth  the  dead,  even  so  the  Son 
quickeneth  whom  he  will.'  Here,  then,  he  declares 
himself  equal  with  the  Father  in  sovereignty  of  will, 
as  well  as  in  almighty  power."  The  Editor  again 
omits  a  part  of  the  sentence  which  runs  thus  :  "  So 
the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will ;  FOR  the  Father 
judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  committed  all  judgment  un- 
to the  Son."  Does  not  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence 
shew  clearly,  that  the  power  which  the  Son  enjoyed, 
in  quickening  those  whom  he  chose,  was  entirely 
owing  to  the  commission  given  him  by  the  Father  ? 
In  order  to  weaken  the  force  of  verse  22,  the  Editor 
says,  "  The  Father,  however,  whose  it  is  equally 
with  the  Son,  commits  all  judgment  to  the  Son, 
as  the  incarnate  mediator  between  God  and  man, 
because  he  is  the  Son  of  Man."  My  readers  may 
observe,  that  if  Jesus  received  all  power  of  judging 
men  in  his  human  nature,  he  must  have  quickened 
whom  he  pleased,  as  the  consequence  of  that  power, 
in  his  human  capacity ;  how,  then,  could  the  Editor 
infer    the  deity   of   Jesus    from   one    circumstance, 


ill 


270 


271 


(quickening  the  dead,)  which  entirely  depends  upon 
another,  (the  power  of  judging,)  enjoyed  by  him  in 
his  human  nature?  Lest  it  should  be  supposed  that 
individual  instances  of  the  dead  being  raised  by  Je- 
sus is  here  meant,  I  may  just  mention  that  he  exer- 
cised this  power  in  common  with  other  prophets. 

As  to  his  assertion,  that  the  work  of  judging  man- 
kind belongs,  by  nature,  equally  to  the  Son  and  to 
the  Father,  I  only  refer  the  Editor  to  Matt.  xix.  28, 
and  Luke  xxii.  29,  30,  in  which  the  apostles  are  rep- 
resented as  invested  with  the  power  of  judging  the 
Twelve  Tribes  of  Israel,  and  to  1  Cor.  vi.  2,  which 
ascribes  the  power  of  judging  the  world  to  righteous 
men  ;  and  I  hope  that  the  Editor  will  be  convinced, 
from  these  authorities,  that  the  ''  work  of  judging 
mankind"  does  not  "  belong,  by  nature,  to  the  Son 
and  to  the  Father."  He  introduces,  in  the  course 
of  this  argument,  John  viii.  58,  and  Rev.  i.  8,  which 
1  have  often  examined  in  the  preceding  pages,   248. 

123. 

He  at  last  comments  on  verse  23,  ''  That  all  men 
should  honor  the  Son  as  they  honor  the  Father," 
saying,  that,  *'  to  this  glorious  declaration  of  the 
Son's  Godhead,  our  author  merely  objects,  that  this 
means  likeness  in  nature  and  quality,  and  not  in  exact 
degree  of  honor.  But  what  are  the  nature  and 
quality  of  the  honor  paid  to  God  the  Father  ?  di- 
vine honor  of  the  highest  kind,  and  such  as  can  be 
be  given  to  no  creature  ?"  The  phrases,  "  to  hon- 
or God,"  and  "  to  adore  God,"  are  used  in  quite  dif- 
ferent senses  ;  the  latter  being  peculiarly  applicable 
to  God,  but  the  former  generally  implying  only  such 


manifestation  of  reverence    as  one    may   bestow  on 
his  Father,  or  on  another  worthy  of    respect.     Mai. 
i.  6  :  "A  son  honoreth  his  father,  and  a  servant    his 
master  :  if  then  1  be    a  Father,  where   is  mine   hon- 
or?" &c.     Here  God  requires  the  same  kind  of  hon- 
or to  be  paid  him  as  is  due  to  a  father.     Does  God 
here  bring  himself,  in  consequence,  to  a  level  with  a 
parent  ?      I  Sam.  ii.  30 :  "  But  now  the  Lord  saith. 
Be  it  far  from  me  ;  for  them  that  honor  me,  1   will 
honor." — Here  the  manifestation  of  honor  between 
God  and  men,  is  reciprocal ;  but  in  any  sense  what- 
soever, no  worship  can  be  reciprocally  off'ered  by  God 
and  his  creatures.     The  Editor  again  advances,  that 
"  the  fact  is,  that  this  phrase  'a^,'  really  refers  to  de- 
cree as  well  as  to  nature;  see  Matt.  xx.  14:  'I  will 
give  unto  this  last  even  as  unto  thee,'  that  is,  precise- 
ly as  much  as  one  penny."     I  deny  the   accuracy  of 
this  rule  of   the  Editor,   since  "as,"  in  almost  all  in- 
stances, refers   either   to   degree  or  nature,  or  to 
some   kind  of   resemblance,  a  few  of  which  1  shall 
here   notice.     Gal.  iv.  14,     Paul   says  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  "  But   received   me   as  an  angel  of  God,  even 
as  Christ  Jesus,'^     Did  Paul  permit  the  Galatians  to 
receive    him  with  precisely  the  same  kind  of  honor, 
both  in  kind  and  degree,  as  was  due  to  Christ  Jesus? 
Matt.  X.  25 :    "It  is  enough  for  the  disciple  that  he 
be  as  his  master,  and  the  servant  as  his   Lord,"  &:c. 
Did    Matthew    mean    here,  precise  equality  in  kind 
and  degree,   between  a  disciple  and   his  master,  and 
a  servant  and  his  Lord  ?  xix.   19  :  "Thou  shaltlove 
thy   neighbor   as   thyself."      Did  the    Saviour  mean 
here,    that  precisely  the  same  quality  and  degree  of 


U 


272 

love,  which  one  entertains  towards  liiniself,  should 
be  entertained  towards  others?  Gen.  iii.  22  :  "  Be- 
hold the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us."  Did  Adam 
then  become,  both  in  nature  and  degree,  equally 
wise  with  the  Omniscient  God  ?  Now,  my  readers 
will  judge  whether  or  not  such  a  phrase  as  "  men 
should,  or  may,  honor  the  Son  as  they  honor  the 
Father,"  equalizes  the  Son,  in  nature  and  degree, 
with  the  Father.  As  to  the  verse  above  quoted, 
(Matt.  XX.  14,)  it  implies  sameness  in  degree,  and 
not  necessarily  sameness  in  kind,  for  the  same  sum 
may  be  given  in  different  currency.  The  Editor 
quotes  Heb.  iii.  3,  4,  in  order  to  shew  "in  what 
sense  the  Prophet  to  be  sent  was  like  Moses."  As 
1  examined  this  verse  in  page  125,  I  will  not  recur 
to  it  again.  I  only  remind  the  Editor  of  Deut.  xviii. 
15,  18,  where  he  will  perceive  in  what  sense  Jeho- 
vah himself  drew  a  likeness  between  the  Saviour 
and  Moses,  which  passage  is  repeated  in  Acts  iii. 
22,  and  also  of  St.  Matt.  xvii.  3,  as  well  as  of  Mark 
ix.  4,  wherein  they  express  a  wish  to  manifest  the 
same  reverence  to  the  Saviour  as  to  Moses  and 
Elias ;  but  it  is  quite  optional  with  the  Editor  to 
treat  Moses  in  any  manner  he  pleases. 

In  answer  to  his  inquiry,  "  Why  should  it  offend 
our  author,  that  when  the  Son,  for  the  suffering  of 
death,  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant  ?"  &c. 
My  reply  is,  that  it  does  not  offend  me  in  the  least ; 
but  I  must  confess,  that  such  an  expression  as  when 
God,  "for  the  suffering  of  death,  took  upon  him  the 
form  of  a  servant,"  seems  to  me  very  extraordinay, 
as  my  idea  of  God  is  quite  at  variance  with  that  of 
tt  beino[  subjected  to  death  and  servitude. 


4 


275 


The  Editor  overlooked  several  other  passages, 
quoted  by  me,  among  which  there  was  Matt.  xx.  23, 
"To  sit  on  my  right  hand,  and  on  my  left,  is  not 
mine  to  give,  but  to  them  for  whom  it  is  prepared 
of  my  Father." 

He  jxirhaps  hesitated  to  rely  on  the  sophistry 
used  by  the  orthodox,  that  Jesus  denied  being  pos- 
sessed of  almighty  power  only  in  his  human  capac- 
ity. The  Editor,  it  is  possible,  perceived,  that  as 
the  gift  of  all  power  to  Jesus,  mentioned  in  Matt. 
xxviii.  18,  is  explained  by  tiie  orthodox  of  his  human 
capacity  ;  the  denial  of  almighty  power  could  not, 
therefore,  be  understood  of  that  very  hmnan  nature 
m  which  he  is  said  to  have  possessed  it. 

FIFTH    POSITION. 

The  Editor  says,  that  "  our  author's  objections  to 
the  fifth  position,  that  Jesus's  having  all  judgment 
committed  to  him,  proves  his  omniscience,  have  been 
so  fully  met  already,  that  scarcely  any  thing  remains 
to  be  added." 

In  answer  to  which,  I  have  only  to  say,  that  the. 
arguments  adduced  by  the  Editor  having  been  pre- 
viously noticed,  it  is  therefore  left  to  my  readers  to 
examine  them,  and  to  come  to  a  determination 
whether  they  tend  to  prove  the  omniscience  of  the 
Son  or  not.  The  Editor,  however,  adds  here,  that 
omniscience  is  essential  to  the  act  of  judging  man- 
kind. As  1  have  already  dwelt  much  on  this  subject 
in  the  preceding  position,  pp.  268,  26f>,  and  also  in  p. 
156,  I  beg  to  refer  my^  readers  to  them,  wherein 
they  will  find  that  the  Son's  knowledge  of  t!)e  events 

35 


\» 


\ 


274 

of  this  world  extends  no  farther  than  as  repj^ects  the 
office  of  judging  mankind  ;  that  others  are  declared 
to  be  vested  with  the  power  of  jndgintr  the  world 
as  well  as  the  Son;  and  that  the  Son  positively  de- 
nies his  omniscience  in  Mark  xiii.  32.  The  Editor 
concludes  by  saying,  that  "  his  (Father's)  giving  him 
'  to  have  life  in  himself,'  refers  wholly  to  his  being 
the  mediator  in  human  flesh."  It  settles  the  ques- 
tion at  once,  that  whenever  and  in  whatever  capac- 
ity Jesus  is  declared  to  have  had  life,  he  had  it  as 
a  gift  of  the  Father;  and  the  object  of  our  inquiry 
and  reverence  is  the  Son  endowed  with  life,  and  not 
one  destitute  of  it. 

SIXTH    POSITION. 

The    Editor    begins   by   observing,    tliat    "  to  the 
sixth  position,   that   Jesus  accepted   worship   due  to 
God  alone,  our  author  objects,  '  That  the  word  '  wor- 
ship,' both  in  commoi]  acceptation  and  scriptural  writ- 
ings, is  used  sometimes  as  implying  an  external  mark 
of  religious  reverence    paid    to    God,    and   at  other 
times  as  signifying  merely  the  token  of  civil   respect 
due  to  superiors;   that  those  who  worshipped   Jesus 
did  not  believe  him  to  be  God,  or    one  of  the   three 
persons  of  the  Godhead  ;   and  Jesus,  in  his  acknowl- 
edged human  capacity,  never  prayed  to    himself,   or 
directed    his  followers  to  worship  or   pray   to  him.' 
Granting  that  '  worship'  in    English,  and  ^^'^^^^^^^^^  in 
Greek,  are  sometimes  used  to  denote  civil    respect, 
and  that  the  worship  paid  by  the  servant  to  his  mas- 
ter, Matt,    xviii.    26,    and  by    the  people   to   David, 
meant  merely  civil   respect,   still    the  position  is  not 


270 


touched  in  the  least  degree."  The  reason  which 
the  Editor  assigns  for  this  position  not  being  touched, 
is,  that  "  whether  the  blind  man,  the  lepers,  the  ma- 
riners, and  others,  knew  what  they  did  in  worship- 
ping Jesus,  is  not  so  much  the  question,  as  whether 
Jesus  knew;  for  if  he  suffered  them,  even  through 
ignorance,  to  yield  him  divine  worship,  when  Peter 
did  not  suffer  it  in  Cornelius  for  a  moment  ;  unless 
he  were  God,  he  must  have  had  less  discernment,  or 
less  piety  and  concern  for  the  Divine  honor,  than 
his  own  disciples."     P^'^ge  618. 

As  the  Editor  agrees  that  the  term  "'worship'  in 
English,  and  -Tgoaxvieu)  in  Greek,  are  sometimes  used 
to  denote  civil  respect,"  it  is  of  course  necessary  to 
ascertain  whether  the  blind  man,  &c.  knew  what 
they  did  in  worshipping  Jesus;  that  is,  whether  they 
mean  to  bestow  civil  respect,  or  to  offer  religious 
reverence.  But  from  all  the  local  circumstances 
which  I  pointed  out  in  the  Second  Appeal,  page  193, 
it  is  evident  that  they,  as  well  as  Jesus,  knew  that 
they  were  manifesting  civil  respect  only  by  worship- 
ping him,  in  the  same  way  as  it  is  evident,  from  the 
circumstances  of  David's  not  declining  to  receive 
worship  from  the  people,  and  Daniel  from  king  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, that  the  people  and  king  intended 
merely  civil  respect  to  them.  As  to  Peter's  rejec- 
tion of  the  worship  otlered  him  by  Cornelius,  it  may 
easily  be  accounted  for,  since,  as  Jesus  was  endowed 
with  the  power  of  knowing  things  connected  with 
his  divine  commission,  so  Peter  had  the  knowledge 
of  secret  events  concerning  his  apostolic  duty.  From 
the  language  which  the  blind  man  and  others  used, 


4a> 


1 


270 

and  from  his  knowledge  of  their  thoughts,  the  Sav- 
iour, hke  other  ancient  prophets,  gave  a  tacit  consent 
to  the  worship  (or,  properly  speaking,  civil  reve- 
rencc)  offered  by  them;  while  Peter  rejected  the 
worship  offered  him  by  Cornelius,  knowing  that  he 
meant  it  as  an  external  mark  of  religious  reverence, 
which  was  due  to  God  alone,  as  is  evident  from  the 
language  of  Peter,  ^'  1  myself  am  a  man."  Having 
already  noticed  tlie  exclamation  of  Thomas  in  page 
232,  233,  and  Hrb.  i.  10,  m  page  77,  1  shall  not 
recur  to  the  subject  in  this  place. 

The  Editor  says,  "  Was  Stephen  (ignorant)  when 
he  committed  to  him  his  departing  soul,  in  language 
similar  to  that  in  which  Christ  on  the  cross  had  com- 
mitted his  spirit  to  the  Father?" 

The  language  of    Stephen   alluded  to  by  the  Edi- 
tor, and  that  of   Christ,    bears  little    resemblance. 
Among  the  many   expressions  attributed  to  Jesus  on 
the  cross,  none  of  them   resemble    the  invocation  of 
Stephen,  except  that  given  Luke  xxiii.  46,  "Father, 
into  thy  hands  I  commend  my   spirit:"  which  is  nat- 
ural for  every  human  being  having  any  idea  of  God, 
or  feelings  of  devotion  on  the  approach  of  death. 
Stephen's   exclamation  (Acts  vii.  59,  "Lord   Jesus, 
receive  my  spirit")  was  merely    an    application  to 
Jesus  in  preference  to  the  angels  of  death,  whom  he 
expected  to  receive   his  soul,  and  convey  it  to   the 
bosom  of  the   Divinity.      The    notion  of    angels  of 
death  receiving  and  conveying  away  the  spirit  at  the 
time  of  dissolution,  is  familiar    to  the  Jews,   in  com- 
mon  with  other  Eastern  nations,  as  appears  from  their 
traditions,  and  from   Prov.  xvi.   14,  "The   wrath  of 


277 

a  king  is  as  messengers  (in  the  Hebrew,  properly 
"angels")  of  death"' — i.  e.  in  a  despotic  country,  the 
displeasure  of  the  tyrant  is  equivalent  to  death. 
From  Stephen's  saying,  that  he  saw  "the  Son  of 
Man  standing  on  the  right  hand  of  God,"  we  may 
easily  perceive  the  notion  which  he  had  formed  of 
the  nature  of  Jesus  Christ. 

As  to  Christ's  offering  prayers  and  worship  to  the 
Father,  and  directing  his  apostles  to  do  so,  the  Edi- 
tor attributes  them  to  the  "state  of  humiliation  in 
which  his  infinite  love  to  sinners  had  placed  him."  If 
Jesus  deemed  it  necessaiy,  in  his  human  capacity,  to 
offer  up  prayers,  thanksgiving,  and  worship,  to  God 
the  Father  alone,  notwithstanding  he  was  filled  bodi- 
ly with  God  the  Son,  (according  to  the  Editor,)  and 
[to]  direct  his  apostles  to  follow  his  example,  is  it  not 
incumbent  also,  in  following  his  pattern,  to  thank, 
pray  to,  and  worship  the  Father  alone^  as  long  as  wc 
are  human?  But  the  truth  is,  that  the  assertion  of 
the  Editor,  attributing  Christ's  devotion  towards  God 
to  his  human  nature,  is  entirely  unsupported  by 
scriptural  authority. 

The  Editor  further  says,  that  if  Jesus  were  not 
God,  the  apostles,  the  primitive  saints,  and  the  an- 
gels in  heaven,  would  be  guilty  of  idolatry,  and  the 
Eternal  Father  of  encouraging  it. 

To  quit  the  Father  and  Jesus  Christ  of  the  charge 
of  encouraging  idolatry,  and  the  apostles,  and  the 
saints,  and  the  angels,  of  the  sin  of  idol  worship,  it 

suffices  to  quote  Matt.    iv.   10,     Avzw  fiovto    Xazgav6ecg^ 

"  Him  only  shalt  thou   serve."     This  commandment 
of  the  Father  of  the  universe,  to   be  found  in  Deut. 


4i> 


27a 


279 


vi.  [13],  repeated  and  corniiiiiiiicated  to  C!n*istians  by 
the  most  exalted  among  the  prophets,  (who  enjoins 
rehgious  adoration  to  be  oiTered  to  the  Father  alone,) 
sutticiently  vindicates  God  and  his  Christ  from  the 
above  charge.  The  apostles  so  strictly  observed 
this  divirie  communication  through  their  Master,  un- 
der the  Christian  dispensation,  that,  throughout  the 
tvhok  New  Testament,  they  applied  exclusively  to 
God  alone  this  verb,  Xax^tvw^  (rendered  in  the  English 
version  "  to  6erre,'')  and  not  once  to  Jesus,  or  to  any 
other  being  in  any  book  of  the  New  Testament;  while 
on  similar  occasions,  they  used  for  him  or  others  the 
verbs  dov/.tvo)  or  diaxoinoy  rendered  also  in  the  En- 
<rlish  version  '•  to  5c/rc,"  which  tends  no  less  to  vin- 
dicate  them.  Tiiey  further  pronounce  those  who 
serve  (from  the  verb  /cm^evo))  any  one  except  God, 
to  be  rebels  and  idolators, — Rom.  i.  25  ;  Acts  vii. 
42.  I  now  entreat  the  Editor  to  examine  the  sulj- 
ject,  and,  by  following  the  example  of  the  apostles 
and  primitive  saints,  glorify  a  religion  intended  to  be 
raised  far  above  the  debasement  of  idolatry. 

THE    SEVENTH    A>D    LAST    POSITION. 

The  Editor  having  attempted  to  prove  the  Deity 
of  the  Son,  and  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
from  the  circumstance  of  their  names  being  associat- 
ed with  that  of  the  Father  of  the  universe,  I  observ- 
ed in  my  Second  Appeal,  that  "  a  profession  of  belief 
in  God  is  unquestionably  common  to  all  religions  sup- 
posed to  have  been  founded  upon  the  authority  of 
the  Old  Testament;  but  each  is  distinguished  from 
the  other  bv  a  public  profession  of  faith  in  their  re- 


V 


spective  founders,   expressing   such  profession  in   a 
language  that  may  clearly  exhibit  the  inferior  nature 
of  those  founders  to  the  Divine  Being,  of  whom  they 
declare  themselves   tlie    messengers."     "The  Jews 
claim  that  they    have  revelation  rendering   a    belief 
not  in  God  alone,  but  in  Moses  also,  incumbent  upon 
them.      Exod.    xiv.    31:     'The    people    feared   the 
Lord,  and  believed  the  Lord,  and  his  servant  Moses,' 
(to  which  Jesus  also  refers  in  John  v.  45,  'There  is 
one    that    accuseth    you,  even    Moses,   in    whom  ye 
trusf).     If   baptism    were   administered   to  one  em- 
bracing Christianity,  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and 
Holy   Spirit,  he  would  thereby  no  more  become  en- 
rolled as  a  Christian  than  as  a  Jew  or  a  Mohummu- 
dan;  for  both  of  them,  in  common  with  Christians 
would  readily  submit  to  be  baptized   in   the  name  of 
God,  or  his  prevailing  in^uence  over  the    universe." 
I  afterwards  added,  in   the  discussion  respectino-  the 
Holy  Spirit,  that  "God   is  invariablv   ronresented  in 
.  revelation   as    the    main  object    of   belief,  receiving 
worship  and  prayers   that    proceed  from  the   heart 
through  the   first-born  of  every  creature,  the   Mes- 
siah, (' No  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  bv  me,') 
and  leading  such  as   worship    him  in  spirit,  to  right- 
eous conduct,  and  ultimately  to  salvation,  throfigh  his 
guiding  inrtuence,    which  is   called   the    Holy  Spirit, 
('  When  he,  the  spirit  of  truth,  is  come,  he  will  o-u'ic^e 
you  unto  all  truth').     Inhere    is,   therefore,  a  moral 
obligation  on  those  who  avow  the  truth  of  such  rev- 
elation, to  profess  their  belief  in  God  as  the  sole  ob- 
ject   of   worship;  and   in   the  Son,  through    whom 
they,  as  Christians  should  olTer  divine  homage;  and 


^M.» 


280 

also  in  the  holy  influence  of  God,  from  which  thej 
should  expect  direction  in  the  paths  of  righteousness, 
as  the  consequence  of   their  sincere  prayer  and  su|> 
plication.      For    the    same    reason    also,   in   publicly 
adopting  this  religion,  it  is  proper  that  those  who  re- 
ceive it  should  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Fath- 
er, who  is  the  object  of  worship;  of  the  Son,  who 
is  the  mediator;  and  of  that  influence  by  which  spir- 
itual blessings  are   conveyed  to  mankind,  designated 
in  scripture,  a.  the   Comforter,  Spirit   of  Truth,  or 
Holy   Spirit."     And  to  prove  the  error  of  the  idea 
that  the  association  of  names  of  individuals  with  that 
of  God,   in  a  religious  profession  of  belief,  which    is 
more  essential  than  any  external  mark  of  profession, 
could  identify  or  equalize  those  individuals  with  God, 
I  quoted  Exod.  xiv.  31,  which  I  have  just  repeated, 
and  2  Chron.  xx.   20,    «  Jehoshaphat  stood  and  said. 
Hear  me,  O  Judah,  and  ye  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem; 
believe  in  the  Lord  your  God,  so  shall  ye  be  estab- 
lished ;  believe  his  .jirophets,  so  shall  ye  prosj^ir,"— 
wherein  the  names  of    Moses    and   the   prophets  of 
God  are  associated  with  that  of  the  Deity.      Besides, 
I  observed  to  the  Editor,  that  '^  fire-worshippers,  for 
instance,  insisting  on  the  literal  sense  of  the  words   in 
example  of  the    Rev.    Editor,  might  refer  to   that 
text  in  the  third  chapter  of  Matthew,  repeated  m 
Luke  iii.  16,  in  which  it  is  announced  that  Jesus  '  will 
baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and   with  fire  ;'  and 
they  might  contend,  that  if   the    association,  m  the 
rite  of  baptism,  of  the  names  of  the   Son  and   Holy 
Ghost  with  that  of  the  Father,  be  supposed  to  prove 
then-  divinitv,  it  is  clear  that  Fire  also,  being  associ- 


[• 


^  281 

ated    with  the   Holy  Ghost   in  the  same   rite,  must 
hkewise  be    considered  as  a  part  of  the   Godhead/' 
He  keeps  all  these   arguments  out  of  view,  and,  ac- 
cording to  his  usual  mode  of  reasoning,  repeats  again 
in  his    reply  what    he  thought  the  purport  of  Heb. 
I.     10,    Rev.     ii.    29,    and    has    recourse    ajrain    to 
the    angel  of  Bochim,   <S:c.  which,   having  no  rela- 
tion to  the  subject  in  question,  and  having  been  often 
examined    in  the   preceding    pages,    I  shall   pass  by 
here.      His  only  remark  concerning  this  last  {)osition 
is,  that  "had  the  passage"  (respecting  belief  in  God 
and  his  senmnt  Moses)  "quoted  from  Exod.  xiv.  31, 
been  thai  formulary,  instead  of  being  a  part  of  a  nar- 
rative,    the    omission  in  the  baptismal    rite  of  the 
clause   '  his  servant,'   would   have   been  fatal   to  his 
objection.     If,  then,  the   phrase  '  his  servant,'  marks 
the  inferior    nature  of   this    messenger  of  God,   the 
omission  of  it    in   the   circumstances  just  mentioned, 
unavoidably  proves  the  equality  of  the    Father  and 
the  Son,"  <fcc.      In  the  first  place,  it  is  too  obvious  to 
need  proof,  that  every  circumstance  mentioned  in  the 
sacred  scriptures,  even   in  the  form  of  narrative,   if 
approved  of  God,  is  worthy  of  attention,  though  not 
stated  in  the  formulary   of  a   religious   rite.     But,  in 
the    second    place,    the  passage  quoted  by  me  from 
2  Chronicles,  is   a  commandment   enjoining  belief  in 
God   and    his  Prophets,  even   with  the  omission,  so 
much  desired  by  our   Editor,   of  the  term    "his  ser- 
vants:'    Docs  this  formulary,   1  ask,   witli  the  omis- 
sion of  the  term   ''\m  servants,'"  prove    the    equality 
of  the  Father  and  the  Prophets,   from   the  circum- 
stance of  their  being  associated  with  God  in  a  solemn 
religious  injunction?  36 


282 


283 


In  the  third  place,  the  term  "  Son,*'  equally  with 
the  word  "servant,"  denotes  the  inferiority  of  Jesus 
as  plainly  as  any  expression  intended  to  denote  infe- 
riority can  possibly  do.  But  the  Editor  says,  that 
'•  never  was  there  a  more  humble  begging  of  the 
question  than  the  assertion  that  the  epithet 'Son' 
ought  to  be  understood  and  admitted  by  every  one 
as  expressing  the  created  nature  of  Christ; — why 
ought  it  thus  to  be  understood  and  admitted?"  T 
answer,  because  common  sense  tells  us  that  a  son,  as 
well  as  a  servant,  must  be  acknowledged  to  be  in- 
ferior to  his  father  or  master.  Again,  we  find  Da- 
vid called  the  son  of  God,  Solomon  the  son  of  God, 
Adam  the  son  of  God,  and,  in  short,  the  whole  chil- 
dren of  Israel  denominated  sons  of  God;  yet  repre- 
sented in  scripture  as  inferior  to  God  their  Father; 
nay,  moreover,  Jesus  the  Son  of  God  positively  de- 
clares himself  to  be  inferior  to  his  Father, — "  My 
Father  is  greater  than  1." 

Our  Editor  puts  again  another  query,  (p.  622,) 
"  Can  he  even  prove  that  among  men  a  son  must 
be  of  a  nature  inferior  to  his  father?"  1  reply  by 
putting  another  question  to  him  :  Can  the  Editor 
ever  prove,  that  among  men  a  servant  viust  be  of  a 
nature  inferior  to  his  master  ?  If  he  cannot,  are  we 
to  suppose  Moses,  a  servant  of  God,  equal  in  nature 
with  the  Deity?  The  fact  is,  that  among  men  a 
servant,  a  son,  and  a  grandson,  are  of  the  same  nature 
with  their  masters,  or  fathers  ;  but  when  creation  is 
not  effected  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  there 
need  not  be,  and  is  not,  an  identity  of  nature  between 
one  who  is  called  father,  and  another  called  son:  so 


r 


r 


when  service  is  performed  by  men  to  others  not  of 
their  own  kind,  oneness  of  nature  is  not  necessarily 
found  between  the  servant  and  the  person  served. 

The  Editor  concludes  the  proposition,  saying  that 
'*Our  author  declines  renewing  the  subject    relative 
to  Christ's   declaration,  'Lo,  I  am    with  you    always, 
even  to  the  end  of   the    world,'  which,  however,  we 
are  not  aware  he  has  ever  yet  discussed."     The  fact 
is,  in  examining  Matt,   xviii.   20,  "  For  where  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,   there  am 
I  in  the  midst  of  them,"  which    the   Editor   quoted 
to  establish  the  ubiquity  of  the  Son,  J  inquired  in  my 
Second  Appeal,   "  Is  it   not    evident  that    the   Sav- 
iour meant    here,  by  being  in  the  midst  of  two  or 
three  of  his  disciples,   his    guidance    to  them  when 
joined    together   in  searching  for   the   truth  ?      We 
find  similar  expressions  in  the  scriptures,  wherein  the 
guidance  of  the  Prophets  of  God  is  also  meant    by 
words  that  would  imply  their  presence."     Luke  xvi. 
29:    "  Abraham  said  unto  him.  They  have  Moses  and 
the  prophets,  let  them  hear  them."    And   upon  the 
Editor's    quoting   Matt,  xxviii.  20,  "  1   am  with  you 
always,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world,"  in  all  proba- 
bility to  establish  the  ubiquity  of  Jesus,  I  said  in  my 
Second  Appeal,  (page  199,)   "  1  will  not  renew  the 
subject,  as  it  has  been  already  discussed  in  examinino- 
the  first  position;"  having  shewn  there  that  by  the 
presence  of  Christ,  and  that  of  other  Prophets  that 
may   be   observed   in  any  part  of  the    Bible,  their 
spiritual  guidance  should   be  understood.     My  read- 
ers, therefore,  may  judge  whether   or  not  the  pur- 
port of  the  last-mentioned    verse  is  connected    with 


j: 


284 


2S5 


the  subject  discussed  in  examining  the  first  position. 
I  entreat  the  Editor,  however,  to  reflect  on  the  last 
phrase  of  the  verse  in  question,  i.  c.  '*  always  to  the 
end  of  the  world,"  which,  so  far  from  evincing 
Christ's  eternal  existence,  implies  that  his  influence 
over  his  disciples  extended  only  to  the  end  of  the 
world,  when  he  shall  be  himself  subject  to  the 
Father  of  the  universe.  (I  Cor.  xv.  28.) 


CHAPTER   VI. 

On  the  Holy  Spirit  and  other  Subjects. 

I  EXPRESSED  my  surprise,  in  my  Second  Appeal, 
page  227,  at  the  Editor's  having  "noticed,  in  so  short 
and  abrupt  a  manner,  the  question  of  the  personality 
and  deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  although  the  Editor 
esteems  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  as  equally  distinct 
persons  of  the  Godhead."  I  feel  now  still  more  sur- 
prised to  observe,  that  the  Editor,  in  his  present  re- 
view also,  has  noticed,  in  the  same  brief  manner,  the 
personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ;  as,  while  he  fills 
more  than  a  hundred  pages  in  support  of  the  deity 
of  the  second  person,  he  has  not  allowed  even  a  sin- 
gle page  to  the  question  of  the  third.  He,  at  the 
sfittie  time,  overlooks  almost  all  the  arguments  I  have 
advanced  against  his  feeble  attempt  to  prove  the 
personality  and  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  from  pp.  227 
to  241,  and  in  many  other  places  of  the  Second  Ap- 
peal.    The  Editor,  however,  first  says,  that  "  Ff  he. 


^^ 


t 


in  whom  dwelt  all  truth,  has  declared  him  (the  Holy 
Ghost,  in  Matt,  xxviii.  19)  to  be  as  distinct  in  person, 
and  as  worthy  of  worship  and  adoration,  as  the 
Father  and  himself,  no  further  evidence  is  needed 
either  to  his  personality  or  Godhead."  Had  the 
Editor  thought  the  quotation  of  a  single  verse  a  suf- 
ficient excuse  for  avoiding  the  discussion  of  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  might  have,  on  the 
same  ground,  omitted  to  discuss  the  subject  of  the 
deity  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  noticing,  in  like  manner,  a 
single  verse  of  scripture,  which  he  considered  as  a 
proof  of  the  divine  nature  of  the  Son,  and  thus  sav- 
ed me  the  trouble  of  a  long  controversy.  If  the  as- 
sociation of  names,  in  a  religious  rite,  were  to  be  ad- 
mitted as  a  proof  of  the  personality  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  power  of  God,  another  divine  attribute, 
should  be  considered  God  himself,  it  being:  also  men- 
tioned  jointly  with  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  rite  of  unc- 
tion (Acts  X.  38);  and  Fire  also  should  be  supposed 
to  be  a  distinct  person  of  the  Godhead,  because  we 
find  Fire  associated  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  the  same 
rite  of  baptism  as  1  before  observed  (Luke  iii.  16)  ; 
but  1  shall  not  recur  to  this  subject,  having  fully  ex- 
amined it  in  pp.  280,  281. 

Notwithstanding  my  plain  declaration,  in  the  Sec- 
ond Appeal,  p.  239,  that  "  with  respect  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  I  must  confess  my  inability  to  find  a  sins;lc 
passage  in  the  whole  scriptures,  in  which  the  Spirit 
is  addressed  as  God,  or  as  a  person  of  God,  so  as  to 
afford  believers  of  the  Trinity  an  excuse  for  their 
profession  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost;"  the 
Editor  thought  it  advisable  not  to  dwell  on  the  subr 


t 


286 


ject,  and  only  observes,  "  Were  it  not  needful,  Indeed 
<i  rich  fulness  of  scripture  proof  could  be  adduced  re- 
specting the  Holy  Spirit,  as  well  as  the  Son ;  but  the 
selection  of  a  few  passages  will  be  quite  sufficient." 
These  are  as  follows :  the  first  are  from  the  Gospel 
of  St.  John,  xiv.  13,  26,  xvi.  8,  11,  and  the  last  are 
from  Acts  x.  20,  and  xii.  2.  The  Editor  here  over- 
looks entirely  what  I  stated  in  the  Second  Appeal, 
on  this  very  point;  that  is,  if  from  the  consideration 
of  such  expressions  as,  "God  will  send  the  Holy 
Spirit,"  "  the  Holy  Spirit  will  teach  you,"  "  The 
Holy  Spirit  will  reprove  the  world,"  "  The  Holy 
Spirit  will  glorify  me,"  the  Spirit  be  acknowledged 
a  separate  person  of  the  Deity,  what  would  the  Edi- 
tor say  of  other  attributes,  such  as  mercy,  wrath, 
truth,  &;c.  which  are  also,  in  a  similar  manner,  per- 
sonified in  various  instances  ?  Psalm  Ivii.  3  :  "  God 
shall  send  Jhrth  his  mercy  and  truth."  Ixxxv.  10  : 
•*  Mercy  and  truth  are  met  together;  righteousness 
and  peace  have  kissed  each  other."  Ixxxix.  14: 
•*  Mercy  and  truth  shall  go  before  thy  face."  xciv. 
18:  "  My  foot  slippeth;  thy  mercy,  O  Lord,  held  me 
up."  "  Thy  mercy,  O  Lord,  is  in  the  heavens." 
•*  For  there  is  wrath  gone  out  from  the  Lord." 
Numb.  xvi.  46. 

In  the  course  of  citing  the  above  verses  of  John 
and  Acts,  the  Editor  quotes  Acts  v.  3,  "  Why  hath 
Satan  filled  thine  heart  to  lie  to  the  Holy  Spirit?" 
[4,]  "  Thou  hast  not  lied  unto  men,  but  unto  God ;" 
whence  he  concludes,  that  he  that  lieth  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,  lieth  to  God,  and,  consequently,  the  Spirit  is 
God.     On  this  inference  I  have  alreadv  observed,  in 


f 

/< 


\ 


T 

4 


287 

my  former  Appeal,  that  any  sin  or  blasphemy  against 
one  of  the  attributes  of  God,  is,  of  course,  accounted 
a  sm  or  blasphemy  against  God  himself.  But  this 
admission  amounts  neither  to  a  recognition  of  the 
self-existence  of  the  attribute,  nor  of  its  identity  with 
God.  1  then  referred  the  Editor  to  Matt.  x.  40, 
"  He  that  receiveth  you,  receiveth  me;"  and  now  I 
beg  his  attention  to  1  Cor.  viii.  12,  "  But  when  ye 
sm  so  against  the  brethren,  and  wound  their  weak 
conscience,  ye  sin  against  Christ."  Do  these  passag- 
es identify  or  equalize  the  apostles  of  Jesus  witli 
himself?  Nothing  but  early-acquired  and  long-es- 
tablished prejudices  can  prevent  any  literary  charac- 
ter from  perceiving  such  a  gross  error.  As  to  Acts 
X.  20,  if  the  speaker  be  admitted,  according  to  the 
Editor,  as  a  separate  person,  he  must  then  be  identi- 
fied either  with  the  spirit  of  Cornelius,  who  had  ac- 
tually sent  the  three  men  mentioned  in  ver.  19,  as  is 
evident  from  ver.  8,  or  with  the  angel  of  God,  who 
ordered  Cornelius  to  send  them  to  Peter,  (Ver.  5,) 
a  conclusion  which  would  not,  after  all,  suit  the  pur- 
pose of  the  Editor.  I  entreat  the  Editor  to  take 
notice,  at  least,  of  some  of  my  arguments  against  the 
personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  mentioned  in  chapter 
VI.  of  the  Second  Appeal,  pp.  231—234,  or,  if  he  de- 
clines adventuring  on  this  point  of  theology,  let  him 
candiuly  reduce  the  supposed  persons  of  the  God- 
head from  a  Trinity  to  Duality,  and  this  |>oint  being 
gained,  I  may  then  continue  my  eflforts  with  renewed 
hope  of  reducing  this  Duality  to  the  Everlasting  and 
Indivisible  Unity. 

The     Editor     concludes   his   Essay    with     saying. 


i' 


288 

(j).  624,)  "The  deity  and  the  personahty  of  the  Son 
and  the  Holy  Spirit,   being  esfabhshed,  the  doctrine 
of  the  ever-blessed  Trinity  needs  no  further  coniirm- 
ation  :  it   follows  of  course.      We    shall,    therefore, 
close  our  testimonies  from  scripture,  by  laying  before 
our  readers  tluee   passages,    which  bring  the  sacred 
Three  fully    into   view.     The  first  we    select  from 
Isaiah  xlviii.  [13,]  in   which  one  is   introduced   who 
previously   declares,  '  My   hand  also    hath    laid  the 
foundation  of  the  earth',  &c.,  and  whom,  therefore, 
we  are   at   no   loss  to  recognize.     He,  however,  de- 
clares verse    IG, 'And   now  the  Lord   God  and  his 
Spirit  hath  sent  me.'  "     Now,  supposing   the  person 
who  declares  himself,  in  verse  16,  to  have  been  sent 
by  the  Lord  God  and  his  Spirit,  is  one  of  the  persons 
of  the  Godhead,  whose   hand  hath   laid  the  founda- 
tion of  the  earth,  according  to  the    Editor;  this  ad- 
mission would  be  so  far  advantageous  to  the   cause 
of  the  Editor,  as   respects  the  plurality   of  persons  in 
the  Deity  ;   but  it  w^ould  be  totally  fatal  to  his  grand 
object,    since  it   would   substitute  Isaiah   as  a  divine 
person,  in  the   place  of  Jesus  Christ.       Isaiah     the 
Prophet  is  the  grand  speaker  throughout  the  whole 
of   his   book  ;   who  declares  himself  often  to  have 
been  sent  by  God    as  a  messenger  to  Israel.     He 
often  speaks   abruptly  in  behalf  of   God,  as  if  God 
were  speaking  himself  in  the  course  of  his    own  dis- 
course, as  I  noticed  in  p.  82,  and  sometimes  again  he 
suddenlv  introduces  his  own  sentiments,  w  hilc  he  is  an- 
nouncing  the  words  of  Jehovah,  without  makiitg  any 
distinction.      I    mention  here  only  a  few  instances. 
Isaiah   Ixiii.  6  :  "  I    will    tread   down  the    people  in 


i 


»t 


'j' 


289 
mi..e  a„g„,,  a„d  m.ke  ■!,«,„  <|ru„k  i„  ,„,  f„, ,.  ,„j  , 

:;" """s J-."" "»,>  .„-.„,,i. ,„  .hoi,, '.;  ' 

'  ».«mc„(,o„  ,he  ]o,i,^.ki„d„.,  „f  ,|,c  Lord  L.i 
View."     (]4\    ,,  A ,,  .,         .      ^'^'^^    i^ily   into 

('-i),;a..aee,a;e;;lJr7,.i;;::;^'",7^'" 

(••^•)     '•  '•  even  /,  ha  e  to'  "'%^'^-'^-ans." 

'-kehis„,,,,^      ^^,.^^^  „-''•'".   -d    '.e    .sl,all 

=*|>okc„  i„  secret  fro,,,    l...  1.  '       '"'  ^  ^'"''^  '"" 

t'-'  it  .as,  .l.ero        V  ;:?'•"?'  'T  '^^  "'"'^ 


) 


<*>  '  ~ 


I 

r 

9 

I 


( 


\ 


ji 


1 


290 

of  those   events  :)  and  now  the  Lord  God   and   his 
Spirit  hath  sent  me."  (17.) Expressions  similar  to  the 
phrase,  "From  the    time  that  it  was,  there  am  I," 
are  often  used    by  the  Prophets.     Vide   Jer.    i.  5 : 
''  And  before  thoii  earnest  forth  out  of  the  womb,   I 
sanctified  thee,  and  I  ordained  thee  a    Prophet  unto 
the  nations."     And  so  Isaiah  xhx.  1.    No  one,  1  pre- 
sume, that  ever  read,  even  with  common   attention, 
the  book  of  isalah,  (in  which  speakers  are  introduc- 
ed without  any  distinction,  more  frequently    than  m 
the  other  scriptural  books,)  would  attempt  to  prove 
the  Trinity  or  the   Deity  of  Jesus  Christ,  from  the 
passajre  quoted  by  the  Editor,  unless  he   is  previous- 
Iv  bia'ssed  by  sorne   human  creed,  and  thereby  abso- 
Tutely    prevented    from    comparing  impartially   one 
passage  with  the  other. 

The   Editor  perhaps  means   the    |)ersonality   and 
the  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit   by  the    phrase,  ''  The 
Lord  God  and  his  Spirit  hath  sent  me,"*  (verse  16,) 
seemin-lv  representing  the  Spirit  of  God  as  a  co-op 
erator  wUh  himself.     He  might,  in  that  case,  on  the 
same  ground,  endeavor  to  establish  the    personality 
and  tire  deity  of  Rigfitecusness,  another   attribute  of 
the   Doitv,  as    being   represented  with  God  as   an 
acrcnt     in     Isaiah    hx.    [Ui]    "Therefore    his    arm 
brought  salvation  unto  him,  and  his  Righteousness, 
it  sus'tained   him."      And   he  might   also  attempt   to 
prove  the   personality    and    deity  of  the   breath    of 
God,  which  is,   in  like   manner,   represented  as  a  co- 

^The  Lord  Jiliovi.h  and  hisSpiril  hatli  sent  inc. 


•) 


91 


i 


i 


operator  witli  tlie  Spirit  of  God.  Jol)  xxxiii.  4  :  «  The 
Spirit  of  God  hath  made  me,  and  the  brealli  of  him 
hath  4.,ven  hfc."     Is  tliis  (he    best  of  the   proofs  of 
the  Trinity  with   which  the  Editor  closes  his  testi- 
monies?    If  such   be   his  proofs,  I  am  at  a  loss  to 
guess    what    his   illustrations   will  be.      The  second 
passage,  quoted  by   the  Editor,  is    what  I  have    just 
.     examined  in  pp.  278_2»  I.     The  third  is,  2  Cor.  xiii. 
14,    "  Ihe  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
love  ot  God,  and  the  coranumion  of  the  Holy  Sijirif 
be  with  you  all.     Amen."    Here    tlie  apostk-  pLs,' 
that  the  guidance  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  love  of  God 
and  the  constant  operation  of  the    holy  iniluence  of 
t^od,    may    be    with  Christians,   since,    witliout  the 
g.i.dancc   of  Jesus,   no   one  can   be   thoroughly   im- 
pressed with  the  love  of  the  Deity  under  the  Chris- 
.an  dispensation,  nor  can  that  love  of  God  continue 
to  exist  unless  preserved  by  divine  influence;  a  fact 
which     have  demonstrated,  pp.  2»4-2«G.  in  exam- 
.nmg  Matt,  xxvlii    ,9.    But  what  has  this  passage  to 
do  with  the  proof  of  the  deity  of  Jesus  and  the  per- 
sonahty  of  the  Holy  Spirit?    Does  not  Paul  call^tiie 
Ph.lhpians  partakers  of  A«„t,„  grace?    Phili    17 
Is  not  every  man  pure  in  heart,  declared  to  bo' pos- 
sessed of  the   grace  of  his   lios  •   rl.nf  ;=  k  i 
structions?    P.ov    xxii    I       7^  ' /''.^^ '^' /^^'b^'  ■«- 

the  communion  of  goodness  and  niercy  desired  for 
all  the  days  of  life?  C,,.  ^uch  expressions  be  i^ 
considered  as  proofs  of  the  deity  of  Paul,  or  of  til 
perso..  ty  of  these  attributes  ?  I  hope  and  pray 
the  Editor  may  take  all  those  circumstances  into  h,( 
serious  consideration. 


I 


( 


^1  '  Ari 


I  now  examine  the  rcnmiiiin^  few  of  those  passu- 
2;es,  which  I  intrnded  to  notice  in  a  suhsequcnt 
Chapter  of  this  Kssav.  The  first  is,  Zech.  xii.  10. 
"In  that  day  they  shall  look  upon  nie  whom  they 
have  pierced,"  compared  with  John  xix.  37,  "They 
shall  look  on  him  whom  they  pierced."*  To  shew 
the  error  in  the  translation  of  the  verse  in  the  En- 
Sjlish  version,  I  fjuoted  in  my  Second  Appeal,  the 
verse  in  the  oriirinal  Hebrew,  and  a  translation  there- 
of  from  the  Arabic  Bible,  and  another  from  the 
Septuagint,  with  a  literal  English  translation,  which 
I  repeat  :  "  And  they  shall  look  toward  me  on  ac- 
count of  him  whom  they  have  pierced."  But  in  or- 
der to  destroy  the  validity  of  the  Arabic  Bible  and 
that  of  the  Septuagint,  the  Editor  says,  that  "  the 
Greek  and  Arabic  versions  are  nothing  to  the  origi- 
nal text  itself.''  1  perfectly  agree  with  him  in  this 
assertion,  but  I  am  convinced,  that  the  Editor  must 
be  better  acquainted  than  myself  with  the  prevail- 
ing^ and  continued  practice  among  Christian  theolo- 
gians, to  have  recourse  to  the  versions,  especially  to 
the  Septuagint,  when  a  dispute  arises  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  any  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to 
o-ive  preference  to  the  authority  of  the  Septuagint, 
even  over  that  of  Jerome's,  which  the  Editor  quotes 
in  opposition  to  the  Arabic  and  Greek  versions. 

As  to  the  original  text,  the  Editor  first  observet 
that  "  as  to  the  particle  Hii  cth^  which  the  best  He- 
brew grammars  deiine  a  particle  marking  the  ac- 
cusative case  governed  by  active  verbs,  or  an  em- 
phatic particle  denoting  the  very  thing  itself."  I 
therefore  think  it  proper  to  (juotc  l\irkhurst's  opin- 


293 


•"'4- 


ion  on  the  particle    HN   eth,  from  his   Hebrew  Lexi- 
con, that  my  readers  may  judge  whether  or  not  the 
^-^bove  rule,  laid  down  by  the  Editor,  is  fo.mded  upon 
good  authority.    Parkhurst  (p.  48)  :  «  The  Lexicons 
say,  that  when  joined   with  a  verb,  it  {cth)  denotes 
the  am/.s«//rc  case,  if  the  verb  be  active ',   see  Gen.  i. 
1,   and  al    freq.,  but    the  nomlanlive,  if  the  verb    be 
passive  or  neuter.    Gen.  xxvii.  45;   Deut.   xx.  8;  Josh. 
VII,  Ifj,  &c.,  al    freq.     But,  in  truth,   it  is  the  sign  of 
no  particular  case,  that    distinction    hi,\n^  unknown  m 
Hebrew,     See  Josh.  xxii.  17;  Ezek.  xxxv.  10  ;  Numb. 
X.  2;  I  Sam.  xvii.  34; 2  Sam.  xv.  23  ;  Neh.  ix.  19,  34; 
2   Kings   vi.  5."    Parkhurst    gives  also    the    second 
meaning  of  this  particle—"  2,  with,  to,  towards,  Exod. 
I.  1,   Deut.  vii.   8,"  which   the  Editor  also  partially 
admits.  ^ 

The  fact  is,  this  particle  denotes  an  accusative 
case  as  well  as  other  cases,  and  also  stands  for  the 
Engli.,h  prepositions,  "  with,"  "  for,"  "  towards,"  &c. 
and,  therefore,  the  verse  in  question,  as  \i  is  found 
in  our  Hebrew  copies  of  the  Old  Testament,  should 
indisputably  be  thus  read,  inconsistence  with  its  con- 
text, 31  :  "  And  they  shall  look  towards  me  for  (or 
on  account  of)  him  whom  they  have  pierced,"  or 
"They  shall  look  upon  me  with  him  whom  they  have 
pierced."* 

;  Nowcomc   rrads  "Ami  they   .hnll   look  on  him  whom  they  pierced  " 
His  note  on  this  translation  is  as  follows  :  -On  him.!     Thirtv-siv  M^is   oli^ 
two  ed    read  1,^K  :  three  other  MSS.  read  so  originally  ;    ix  perhap.  read  so 
SIX  read  so  now  ;  and  eleven  have  .^Sk  in  the  margin!  L,  Ken.     And  yet 'Ck 
on  me,    may  bo  traced  in  the  ancient  versions  and  Chald.  ,.*?«  was  also  not 
ed  as  a  various  lection  by   R.   Saadias.  who  lived  about  the  year  900      Sel" 
Kenn.  diss  gen   §  43      '  Citant  vSn  Talmud  et   R.  Saadias  iCgaion    Poc 
Append.  ,n  Mai.'  Seeker.  «  Dr.  Owen  shews  that  Ignatius,  Justin^AlXV  Ir«' 
nau.,  Tertullian,  and  Rarnabas,  favor  the  reading  of  vW«  Inquiry-SeT Ver" 
sion  >ert.  iv."  "^  ^     »fr- 


294 

The  Editor  quotes,  to  my  r^reat  surprise,  (in  page 
546,)  some  verses  iu  wliich  the  particle  HN  requires 
an  accusative  case,  and  consequently,  no  preposition 
"for,"  "to,"  or  "with,"  can  be  properly  placed. 
But  I  beg  to  ask  the  Editor,  how  he  can  turn  the 
following  verses  to  his  purpose,  wherein  no  accusa- 
tive case  after  the  particle  ^l^^  can  be  at  all  admit- 
ted ?  Exodus  i.  1:  "  xNow  these  are  the  names  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  which  came  into  Egypt; 
every  man  and  his  household  came  icith  Jacob." 
Would  the  Editor  thus  render  the  particle  here  re- 
quiring an  accusative  case, — "  every  man  and  his 
household  came  Jacob"?  Would  the  verse  in  this 
case  bear  any  sense?  Gen.  xliv.  4:  "l^i?."?  n*^  "^^^^^ 
on  "They  were  gone  out  of  the  city."  I'here  the 
particle  stands  for  "  out  of,"  or  "from."  iv.  1  :  "  f 
have  gotten  a  mmi/rom  the  Lord."  Here  the  prep- 
osition "from"  is  substituted  for  this  very  Hebrew 
particle.  In  Deut.  vii.  8,  we  iiave  ClDN^  Hin^ 
nlinNO  *D,  literally,  -on  account  of  tiie  love  of 
God  for  you,"  though  thus  rendered  in  the  English 
version,  "  Because  the  Lord  loved  you."* 

In  the  course  of  examining  this  subject,  the  Editor 
quotes,  "Thy  throne,  O  Jehovah,  is  forever  and  ev- 
er." 1  shall  feel  obliged,  if  he  will  kindly  let  me 
know  from  what  book  of  the  Old  or  New  Testa- 
ment he  has  selected  this  verse,  containing  the  term 
"  Jehovah,"  1n  the  first  part  of  the  text. 

As  to  my  remarks  on  Zech.  xiii.  7,  "Awake,  O 
sword,   against   my  shepherd,  and  against  the   man 

*  Archbishop  Seeker,  in  Newcome,  has  the  following  remark  :  "  Potest 
-iCK  PN  notare  eo  quod,  ut  vcrtunt  6-  ch.  vel  queni.  Vide  Nold.  Et  sic 
post  Dativum  adhibetiir,  Jer.  xxxviii.  9." 


» 


29r) 

that  is  my  fellow,  saith  Jehovah  of  hosts  ;  smite  the 
shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall    be  scattered,"    the 
Editor    agrees    partly    with    me;  saying,  « No    one 
doubts  that  the  Saviour  placed  himself  in  subjection 
ty  the  Father,  when  he   condescended   to    become 
subject  to  death."      He,  however,   wishes  to  prove 
the  deity  of  Jesus  Christ   by  the  application  of  the 
word /c//ou;  (n^DD  to  him.     He   here  quotes   Mi- 
cah  [v.  2],  "  Whose  goings  forth  were  from  everlast- 
ing;" and  John  [i.  IJ,  "  And  the  word  was  with  God,^^ 
which  have  no   relation  to  the  term  D'O};  or  fellow 
found  in   the  verse   in  question;  and  as  these  quota- 
tions of  the  Editor  have  been  examined  in   pp.  213, 
234,  1   shall    not    recur  to  them  in  this   place.     He' 
lastly  quotes  Park  hurst,  to  shew  that  n'D^;  "  implies 
a  neighbor,  a  member  of  the  same  society."     Is  not 
this  quotation,  defining  the   Hebrew   word  n^O^  as 
"a  neighbor,"  directly  against  the  object  of  the  Ed- 
itor?     If  Christ  is    represented,  either  in  a  real  or 
figurative  sense,  as  standing  on  the  right  hand  of  the 
Deity,  taking  precedence  of  all  those  that  believe  in 
him  as  the  promised  Messiah  sent  from  God,  would 
it  be  inconsistent  in  itself,  or  an  acknowledgement  of 
liis   deity    to  use    the   word  nrt^i*  or  neighbor  for 
Christ?     My  readers  will  observe,  from  the  follow- 
ing quotations,  that  this  very  term  n^D>*    which  is 
rendcred/e/W'  in  the  verse  in  question,  is  translated 
"neighbor"  by  the  very  authors  of  the  English  ver- 
sion, in  many  other  instances.     Levit.  vi.  2,  "or  hath 
deceived  his  neighbor^     The   last  word  is  a  transla- 
tion of  the   term  nV!:^  :  xix.  17,  "Thou  shalt  in  any 
wise  rebuke   thy   '  nci<rhborr'    or  immccth :  ch.  xxv. 
14.  1.^1. 


f 


IS 


296 


The  Editor,  in  speaking  of  Christ,  repeats,  now 
and  tfien,  the  phrase,  "God  blessed  forever,"  perhaps 
alluding  to  Romans  ix.  5. — Among  all  the  interpre- 
tations given  to  this  text,  for  or  against  the  Trinity, 
there  is  the  Paraphrase  of  Locke,  of  whose  name 
the  literary  world  is  so  justly  proud,  which  I  here 
first  quote: — "Had  the  patriarchs,  to  whom  the 
promises  were  made,  for  their  (the  Israelites)  fore- 
fathers; and  of  them,  as  to  his  fleshly*  extraction, 
Christ  is  come,  he  who  is  over  all,  God  be  blessed. 
Amen."  Secondly,  i  shall  cite  here  some  scriptural 
passages  to  shew  that  it  was  customary  with  Jewish 
writers  to  address  abrupt  exclamations  to  God  w  hilo 
treating  of  some  other  subjects,  that  my  readers  may 
be  convinced  that  the  sudden  ii»troduction  of  the 
phrase,  "God  be  blessed  forever,"  in  ver.  5,  by  St. 
Paul,  was  perfectly  consistent  with  the  style  of  the 
sacred  writings.  Psalm  Ixxxix.  51,  52:  "Where- 
with thine  enemies  have  reproached,  O  Lord; 
wherewith  they  have  reproached  the  footsteps  of 
thine  anointed.  Blessed  be  the  Lord  forcvev  more, 
Jmen  and  amen:'  Psalm  civ.  35:  "Let  the  sinners 
be  consumed  out  of  the  earth,  and  let  the  wicked 
be  no  more.  Bless  thou  the  Lord,  O  my  soul.  Praise 
ye  the  Lord:' 

Jf  St.  Paul,  in  his  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
and  in  that  to  the  Ephesians,  declares  j)ositively  tluit 
the  Father  is  the  only  being  who  has  the  right  to 
the  epithet  "  God;'  under  the  Christian  dispeiLtion, 
he  could  not,  as  an  inspired  writer,  be  guilty  of  so 
])alpable  a  contradiction,  as  to  apply  this  very  epithet 


*  Vide  ver.  the  3rd  of  the  same  chaptei,  in  uhicli  I^um!  speaks  of  bis  "  Kii 
mtJii  accorduiir  to  the  tlesh." 


IS 


•2'J7 

to  the  Christ  of  God,  on  another  occasion.  1  Cor. 
VIII.  6 :  «  But  to  us  (Christians)  there  is  but  one  God 
the  Father."  Eph.  i.  17:  "That  the  God  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  tlie  Father  of  glorj,"  &c.  iv.  5, 
6:  "One  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism:  One  God 
and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  through  all,  and 
in  us  all."  ° 

Res|)€cting  1    John  v.  20,    i    beg  to  refer  to  the 
rule  laid  down  by  Bishop  Middleton,  (of  whom  the 
Lditor  speaks  highly  and  justly,  in  p.  535,)  in  his  work 
on  the  Greek  Article,  p.  79:    "  When  two  or  more 
attributives,  joined  by  a  copulative  or  copulatives, 
are  assumed  of  the  same  person  or  thing,  before  the 
first  attributive  the  article  is  inserted;  before  the  re- 
maming  ones  it   is  omitted."     i„  the   passage  under 
consideration  there  are  two  attributives  joined  by  a 
copulative,    and  in  order  to   ascertain  whether  they 
are  assumed  of  the  same  person,  or  of  diferent  per- 
sons, It  IS  only  necessary  to  observe,  that  the  article 
IS  inserted  not  only  before  the   first   attributive,  but 
also  before  the  second,  and  that,  consequently,  « the 
true  God"  is  one  person,    and  "the  eternal  life"  is 
another.     This  perfectly   corresponds  with  the  pre- 
ceding part  of  the  verse,  in  which  «  he  that  is  true  " 
and  "  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,"  are  separately  mentioned. 
Fmding  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Christians, 
during  the   first    three  centuries,  unfavorable   to  his 
sentiments,  the  Editor  prudently  keeps  it  out  of  view 
altogether,  merely  observing,  (p.  625,)  into  that  "we 
do  not  oven  inquire.     Paul  tells  us,  that,  even  in  his 
time,  'the  mystery  of  iniquity'  had  already  begun  to 
work  :  and  John  adds,  that  •  manv   Antichrists'  had 


|1 


r 


298 


already  gone  out  into  the  world."  The  Kditor  must 
be  well  aware  that  those  in  whom  the  mystery  of 
iniquity  was  found,  and  who  were  delected  as  anti- 
christs, were  not  in  the  fellowship  of  true  Christians, 
and  consequently  chinch  histories  .  treat  of  the  prac- 
tice of  the  latter  entirely  distinct  from  that  of  the 
former;  and  it  is  therefore  evident,  that  the  prac- 
tice and  professions  of  primitive  Christians,  who 
were,  generally,  the  contemporaries  of  the  apostles 
or  their  disciples,  are  worthy  of  inquiry  for  the  reg- 
ulation of  the  conduct  of  the  Christians  of  these  days. 
As  to  Mosheim,  the  Editor  says,  "  Even  Mosheim, 
suspected  as  he  is  of  being  imfavorable  to  the  truth, 
establishes  their  faith  in  Christ's  deity  in  the  very 
passage  quoted,  [Second  Appeal]  p.  247,  by  our  au- 
thor against  this  doctrine."  It  appears  from  this 
quotation,  that  they,  when  baptized,  "  made  solemn 
profession  of  their  confidence  in  Christ."  The  Jews, 
as  well  as  almost  all  the  Gentiles,  professed  their 
belief  in  God  ;  but  the  thing  which  was  recjuired  of 
them  by  the  apostles  was,  that  they  should  make 
profession  of  confidence  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ  of 
God  in  the  rite  of  baptism.  If  such  a  profession  of 
confidence  in  Christ  is  admitted  by  the  Editor  as  a 
sufficient  acknowledgment  of  his  deity,  why  should 
he  be  so  hostile  to  those  (whom  he  styles  Unitarians) 
who  are  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  also  pro- 
Jess  their  solemn  confidence  in  him?  Still  further 
am  I  surprized,  that,  when  the  apostle  John  express- 
ly wrote  his  gospel  to  prove  *'  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  (ch.  xx.  .31,)  the  Editor, 
so  far  from   being  satisfied  with   those    who  receive 


299 

iesus  in  the  character  expre.sed  by  these  terms, 
C  the  Chnst,  the  Son  of  God,")  in  the  sense  which 
they  uniformly  bear  in  the  scriptures,  requires  them, 
moreover,  to  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  very 
and  eternal  God,  and  thus  not  only  defeats  the  ol 
ject  oi  the  apostle,  but  even  contradicts  him  in  ex- 
press  language. 

Lolllr   '^f  M '■  *'""   ^'''"'''^'   '"^  ^^^'  "  Respecting 
Locke  and  Newton,  our  reply  is  precisely  the  same! 

the  r  op.„.o„s  .„  divinity  are   nothing  to   us."     The 
Ed. tor,  elated  by  the  general  prevalence  of  the  or- 
hodox  system,   e/TeCed  only  by    perversions  of  the 
•nseofthed.vme    writings,    attempts    to  turn  the 
«uthont.es  of  these  great  men  al.so  to  his  own  pur- 
pose.    "If  (says  he)  Locke,  as   our  author  affilms. 
[Second  Appeal]   (p.  3O.0)    really    thought  that   the 
faith  winch  makes  men  Christians,  includes  their  re- 
ccvmg  Jesus  Christ  for  their  Lord  and  King,  Locke 
knew  that  tins  included  the  belief  of  his  omniscience 
and  ommpresonce,  as,  without  this,    his    being   their 
King  was  only  a  solenu.  u.ockery."     The  Editor  „ru- 
dently    ,,uotes    here  only  a  part  of  the  sentence  of 
Locke  quoted  by  me,   which  he  thought  might  give 
h.m  an  opportunity  of  making  comments  favorable 
o  h,s  creed;  but  ,t  is  fortunate  for  us  that  his  works 
bemg  written  and  printed  in  English,  are  not  liable' 
to  much  critical  perversion.     Locke  says,  "  that  the 
beheving  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah,  includes  in  it  a  re- 
ceivmg  him  for  our  Lord  and   KiW,   PROMISFD 

AND  SENT  FROM  COD"     Ti      ',^^\^^^ 
I       I    .      I.     ^  ^'^"'^  *^^L).        1  he  phrase  chosen 

by  ..jal  celebrated  author,  ^  scnl  from   God,"  denies 

•be  deity  of  Chnst  beyond  doubt,  since  one  sent  by 


h 


:)oo 

another  is  of  course  different  from  him   who   sends 
him.     To  avoid  every  misconstruction  being  thrown 
upon  his   definition,   Locke    chose  the  term  "  God," 
instead  of  any  other  term  in  the  above  phrase,   that 
Jesus  might   be  understood  separately    from    God, 
without  the  least  room  for  the  sophistry  that  might 
represent    him  as  God  the  Son,   sent   from  God  the 
Father.     We,  however,  are  not  at  a  loss  to  discover 
what  Locke  meant  by  the  terms  "  Lord  and  King/* 
when  referred  to  Jesus,  as  he   fully  explained  them 
in  his  Paraphrase  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians. 
As  to  the  term  "  Lord,''  1  lefer  to  the  note  on  1  Cor. 
i.  2  :    "  What    the  apostle   means  by  Lord,  when  he 
attributes  it  to  Christ,  vide   viii.  6."  Paraphrase  on 
viii.  6  :  *'  Yet  to  us  Christians  there  is  but  07ie  God, 
the  Father  and  Juthor  of  all  things,  to  whom  alone  we 
address  all  our  worship  and  service ;   and  one  Lord, 
viz.  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  all  things  come  from  God 
to  us,  and  by  whom  we  have  access  to  the  Father." 
As  to  the  term"  King,''  I  quote  his  Paraphrase  on  ch. 
XV.  24,  which  clearly  represents  his  sovereignty  rs  fi- 
nite: "  After  that  shall  be  the  day  of  judgment,  which 
shall  bring  to  a  conclusion,  and  finish  the  whole  dis- 
pensation to  the  race  and  posterity  of  Adam,  in  this 
world  :  when  Christ  shall  have  delivered  up  the  king- 
dom to  God  the  taiher,  which  he  shall  not  do  till  he 
hath  destroyed  all  empire,  power,  and  authority,  that 
shall  be  in  the  world  besides." 

The  Editor  says  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  "  His  be- 
lief of  Christ's  deity  appears  as  clear  as  the  light, 
from  our  author's  own  quotation,  when  he  said  that 
Christians  of  all  ages  are  represented  as  worhipping 


301 

God  and  the  Lamb."  Newton  was  too  circumspect 
to  leave  his  word  liable  to  perversions  by  the  popu- 
lar opinion.  He  explains  the  sense  in  which  Chris- 
tians  worship  God,  and  also  the  sense  in  which  they 
worship  Jesus— the  one  as  directly  opposed  to  the 
other  as  the  west  to  the  east.  Newton  says,  "  God 
for  his  benefaction  in  creating  all  things,  and  the  Lamb 
for  his  benefaction  in  redeeming  with  his  blood ;  God 
as  sitting  upon  the  throne  and  living/orevcr,  and  the 
Lamb  exalted  above  all  by  the  merits  of  his  death:' 
The  worship  offered  to  the  latter  is  therefore  mere- 
ly  a  manifestation  of  civil  reverence,  as  I  pointed  out 
in  p.  274. 

To  equalize  a  being  exalted  and  worshipped  for  his 
meritorious  death,  with  the  eternal  Supreme  Sove- 
reign of  the  universe,  is  only  an  attempt  to  bring  the 
nature  of  the  Deity  on  a  level  with  a  mortal  creature, 
and  by  no  means  serves  to  elevate  that  creature  to 
the  rank  of  the  Deity.  If  the  Editor  consider  these 
quotations  from  Locke  and  Newton  really  orthodox, 
how  inconsistent  he  must  be  in  condemning  those' 
whose  sentiments  as  to  the  person  of  Jesus  Chl-ist  are 
precisely  the  same ;  to  wit,  that  he  is  the  anointed 
Lord  and  King  promised  and  sent  from  God,  is  worthy 
of  worship  for  his  mediation  and  meritorious  death, 
but  by  no  means  as  a  being  possessed  of  a  two-fold 
nature,  divine  and  human,  perfect  God  and  perfect 
Man!  ^ 

As  to  my  remarks  on  certain  abstruse  reasonings 
resorted  to  by  the  orthodox,  the  Editor  further 
says,  that  he  needs  them  not,  thereby  avowedly  re- 
Imquishino:  reason  in  support  of  the  Trinity:  but,  hap- 


u^ 


vi-Jk 


302 

piJj,  he  asserts  at  the  same  time,  that  « to  us  the 
scriptures  are  sufficient."  J  therefore  entreat  him 
to  point  out  a  single  scriptural  authority,  treating  of 
a  compound  God  of  three  persons,  and  of  a  com- 
pound Messiah,  one  of  these  three  persons  constitut- 
ed of  a  two-fold  nature,  divine  and  human. 

The  Editor  alludes  to  the  term  "antichrists," 
found  in  the  Epistle  of  John  ;  hut  1  aoj  glad  that  we 
most  fortunately  are  furnished  with  the  definition  of 
this  term  by  that  inspired  writer,  which  decides  at 
once  the  question  who  are  the  real  subjects  of  its 
apphcation.  1  John  iv.  3:  "Every  spirit  that  con- 
fesseth  not  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh,  is 
not  of  God;  and  this  is  that  spirit  of  antichrist." 
We  accordingly  rejoice  to  confess  that  Jesus  Christ, 
who  came  in  the  flesh,  is  OF  GOD,  and  that  not  only 
he,  but  his  apostles  also  were  of  God  (1  John  iv. 
6,  V.  19);  but  we  feel  sincerely  for  those  who  vio- 
late this  standard,  either  by  falling  short  or  go'mcr 
beyond  it,  by  denying  that  Jesus  Christ  is  OF  GOD, 
or  by  affirming  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God  himself, 
since  both  these  assertions, — to  wit,  "Jesus  Christ 
is  NOT  of  God,''  and  "Jesus  Christ  is  God," — are 
equally  incompatible  with  John's  proposition,  that 
"Jesus  Christ  is  OF  GOD."  For  example:  The 
prime  minister,  by  the  law  of  the  land,  is  appointed 
by  the  king,  and  consequently  is  acknowledged  to 
be  OF  THE  KING  ;  to  Say,  therefore,  that  he  is  not  of 
the  king,  would  be  to  detract  from  the  minister's 
dignity;  but  to  say  that  the  prime  minister  is  the 
king,  is  not  only  inconsistent  with  the  assertion  that 
the  prime  minister  is  of  the  king,  but  would  be  pro- 


303 

nounced  high  treason ;  in  like  manner  as  deifying 
the  Christ  of  God,  is  both  an  affront  to  God,  and  an 
antichristian  doctrine. 

Lastly,  I  tender  my  humble  thanks  for  the  Edi- 
tor's kind   suggestion  in   inviting   me   to   adopt   the 
doctrine  of    the    Holy   Trinity  ;  but   I   am  sorry  to 
hnd  that  I  am  unable  to  benefit  by  this  advice.     Af- 
ter  I  have  long  relinquished  every  idea  of  a  plurali- 
iy   of   Gods,   or    of  the    persons  of  the   Godhead, 
taught  under   diff^erent  systems  of  modern   Hindoo' 
ism,  I   cannot   conscientiously   and   consistently   em- 
brace one  of  a  similar  nature,  though  greatly  refined 
by  the  religious  reformations  of  modern  times;  since 
whatever  arguments  can  be  adduced   against  a  plu- 
rality of  gods,  strike    with   equal  force  against   the 
doctrine   of  a  plurality  of  persons  of  the  Godhead; 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  whatever  excuse  may  be' 
pleaded  in  favor  of  a  plurality  of  persons  of  the  Dei- 
ty, can  be  offered  with  equal  propriety  in  defence  of 
Polytheism. 

I  now  conclude  my  Essay  by  offering  up  thanks 
to  the  Supreme  Disposer  of  the  events  of  this  uni. 
verse,  for  haying  unexpectedly  delivered  this  country 
from  a  long-continued  tyranny  of  its  former  rulers, 
and  placed  it  under  the  government  of  the  English,' 
—a  nation  who  not  only  are  blessed  with  the  enjoy.' 
ment  of  civil  and  political  liberty,  but  also  interest 
themselves  in  promoting  liberty  and  social  happiness, 
as  well  as  free  inquiry  into  literary  and  religious  sub- 
jects, among  those  nations  to  which  their  influence 
extends. 


\    I 


ii\iii!:x. 


CHAPTER   1. 


■"•§>„, 


< 


Thanks  to  ll.e  Reverend  Editor  for  Ins  labors 
Author's  Vmdication  of  himself  from  the  charge  of  presun.ption 
Necessity  has  driven  the  Author  to  these  publications 
Uuota  ,o„  of  a  part  of"  The  IntroJuction  to  the  Precepts  of  Je- 
sus,"     in  proof  of  this 

Author's  precaution  in  the  Second  Appeal 
Quotation  of  some  parts  of  the  First  Appeal 

belTef"''""  "''  ""  '^'"'"'  "'  '"  '"'  '=""""'"  "'■  "'«  Author's 

.  

Author's  public  avowal  of  his   faith 

Author's  vindicauon  of  himself  from  the'charge  of 'vanity 
«.nb.assed   common  sense  suflices  to  find  the  unscnpturalitv  of 
the  1  unity 

l^xperiment  proposed 

The  Editor's  ridiculing^  of  the  su^jrestion  offered  as'to  tl/e  .tudv 
of  the  Bible        ... 

The  reason  assigned  for  his  disapproval  of  the  suggestion 
Impossibility  ofa  belief  in  the  Trinity  and  Hindoo  Polytheism, 
unless  inculcated  in  youth 

No  liberal  parent  can  take  advantage  of  the  confiding  credulity 
of  his  children ;  Tlie   duties  of  liberal  parents 

The  force  of  early-acquired  prejudices 

Traditional  instructions  inculcated  in  childhood  one  of  the  caus- 
es of  prevailing  errors  in  Christianity         .... 

The  Ediio.'s  ironical  remarks  on  the  success  of  the  Author  in 
scriptural  studies,  noticed 

The  reason  assigned  by  the  Editor,  for  his  omission  of  several 
arguments  in  the  Second  Appeal,  noticed 

The  Editor's  position  of  the  insufiiciency  of  the  Precepts  of  Je- 
sus to  procure  men  salvation,  noticed 

The  irregular  mode  of  arguing  adopted  hv  the  E.litor 

The  sufficiency  of  the  Precepts  of  Jesus  for  salvation  proved 

Mark  xii.  Sli,  "Hear  O  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God  is  one  Loid  " 
referred  to         .         .         . 

30  ■       '       '        * 


Page 


4 

8 
ih. 

ih. 

i) 

t6. 

10 
II 
ih. 

iL 
12 

ib. 
lb. 

la 
lb. 

14 

15 

ib. 

17 

H. 
IS 
19 

20 


y 


24 
ib. 
{b. 


2.1 


S06 

Page 

Matt.  vii.  24,  "Whosoever  hearcth  these  sayings  of  mine,""  re- 
ferred to it. 

John  XV.  10,   "  If  ye  keep  my  commandments,"  &c.  and  v.  14  ; 
Matt.  XXV.  31,  et.  seq.  referred  to ib. 

The  argument  adduced  by  the  Editor  to  depreciate  the  weight - 
ot  the  passage,  "  This  do,  and  thou  shalt  live,"  examined         .     21 

The  Ed'tor'fl  question  "Did  Jesus  regard   tlie  lawyer  as   sin- 
leas  ?"  answered         ........  22 

The  verse  ^'  If  riglileousnes?  came  by  [the]  law,"  &.c.  explained    23 

The  Editor's   omission  to  notice  those  passages  that  represent 
repentance  as  a  sufficient  means  for  procuring  pardon 

Luke  v.  32  xxiv.  47,  xiii.  .3,  referred  to         ...         . 

The  parable  of  the  prodigal  son,  referred  to         .         .         . 

Psalm  li.  17,    "  The  sacrifices  of  God  arc  a  broken  spirit,"  &c. 
Ezek.  xviii.  30,  referred  to 

Prov.  xvi.   6,     "  By  mercy  and  truth  iniquity  is  purged,"  &.c. 
Isaiah  i.  18  ;  Human  Justice,  referred  to         ...         .       ib. 


CHAPTER    IT. 

Inquiry  into  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  Atonement.— A  change 

of  arrangement  by  the  Editor 2G 

Gen.  iii.  15,  "I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman," 

&.C.  examined ih. 

CJen.  iv.  4,     **The  sacrifice  oflfered  by  Abel,  and  approved  of 

God,  in  preference  to  his  brother  Cain's,  examined  .      21) 

John  viii.  56;  Heb.  xi.  26,  noticed  ;  Heb.  xi.  4,  referred  to        29,  30 
How  far  sacrifices  are  divine  institutions         .         ...        31 

Micah  ri.  7,  8,  referred  to ib. 

Hosea  vi.  6,  Isaiah  i.  11, [16— 18,]  Psalm  1.  8,  [8—15,]  referred  to    32 
[1]  Sam.  XV.  22  ,-  Prov.  xxi.  3  ;  Eccl.  v.  1,  referred  to  .33 
In  what  sense  such  expressions  as  "  This  man  after  he  had  offer- 
ed one  sacrifice  for  sins,"  and  others  like  them,  should  be  tak- 
en         ib. 

Common  notions  of  justice  ;  Exod.  xx.  5;  Matt,  xviii.  8,  referred  to  35 

Numb.  xiv.  19,  20 ;  2  Chron.  xxx.  18—20 ;  Psalm  cvi.  23,  xxxii. 
5,  referred  to        ...  S6 

Psalm  exit.  2  ;  Isaiah  Iv.  7;  Jer.  vii.  21—23,  referred  to         .         37 

Ileb.  x.  4,  **  It  is  not  possible  that  the  blood  of  bulls,"  &c.  exam- 
ined         ,*fc. 

Gen.  xxii.  3,  [13,];  Heb.  x.  5,  referred  to  .         .  38,30 


307 


Page 

ib. 


40 

ib. 
lb. 
41 

ib. 


Ihe  death  ofJe.us  wa«  a  spiritual  and  virtual  sacrifice 
Such  terms  as  the  -sacrifice."   "atonement  for  «io,"  <fcc.  being 
tamiliar  to  the  Jewa,  were  adopted  by  the  apostles 

.  Priesthood  without  sacrifice  exist-  under  the  Christian  dispen- 
satiou ^ 

1  Peter  ii.  4,  5,  quoted  in  proof  of  spiritual  sacrifices  ' 
Rev.  1.  6,  XX.  6;  1  Peier  v.  5,  referred  to 

Protectants  explain  such  phra.es  as,  -  Unless  ye  eat  hia  flesh," 
Qtc.  lu  a  spiritual  sc-se         ... 

The  Editor's  reference  to  Noah's  sacrifice,  and  God's'prom'ise 
to  Abraham  and  his  quoting  Job,  [xix.  25,]  "I  know  that  my 
Redeemer  liveth,"  &c.  examined        .  jj   40 

Mati.  V.  8,11,  ^ukexi,  28,  referred  to         .      '         *        * 
Isaiah  Ixiii.  16.     Ix.  16;  Job  xix.  24-26  referred  to 
The  sense  in  which  the  application  of  the  term  "  Lamb"  is  made 

to  Jesus,  discussed 
John  ,xi    15  ;  Luke  x.  3  ;*  Gen!  xxii.  7,  8  ;  Jer.  xi.*  19,  "  But* I 
was  like  a  Lamb,"  &c.  referred  to         .         . 

The  account  of  the  scape-goat,  examined 
Exod.  xxviii.  38,  referred  to  .         ...  * 

P«alm  ii.  1,  compared  with  Acis  iv.  [25,  26,]*  and  Psalm  xvi  8- 
11.  compared  with  Acts  li.  25.  27.  &c.  &c.  noticed  as  bearin-r 
DO  relation  to  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Jesus  4^    47 

Psalm  xl  6-8,  examined  by  referring  to  their  context     *  '  43 

Phe  object  of  Jesus's  mission  was  to  deliver  divine  instructions  '     49 
John  X.  J  7,  -  Fherefore  doth  my  Father  love  me,"  &c.  examined  ib 
Jesus  s  aversion  to  death  like  many  other  prophets 
Matt.  xxvi.  36,  [37—39,]  42,  referred  to        .         .  ' 

Mark  xiv.  36  ;    Luke  xxii.  42—44,  referred  to  * 

The  assertion  of  the  Editor   that   -  This  iniquity,'if  it  be  audi, 

the  Father  willed,"  examined         .... 
The  Editor's  objectioa  to  the  application  of  human  notions  of 

justice  to  judge  tlie  unsearchable  things  of  God,  examined 
The  Editor  s  applying  human  notions  of  justice  to  Divine  things     54 
The  orthodox  divines,  like  the  Editor,  have  recourse  to  humrn 
notions  of  justice  in  their  attempt  to  prove  the  atonement  of 


42 

4.J 

44 

45 
46 
ib. 


50 
t7/. 
51 


52 


53 


Christ 


55 


Examination  of  Isaiah    vii.  14,  deferred  to  the  subsequent  chapter  sij 

Isaiah  XI.  [3]  -And  he  shall  make  him  of  quick  understanding  '» 
&c.  examined  ;  Isaiah  xix.  19,  20,  noticed      ...  ^l 

The  Editor's  attempt  to  prove  the  atonement  from  the  applica- 
tion of  the  term  "  Saviour"  to  Jesus,  examined  5(5  r~ 

Matt.  ix.  8  ;  John  v.  24,   vi.  63,  xv.  3,  referred  to        .'         *      57 '  53 


:iU8 


Pack 


rUht 


ib. 
lb. 

59 


Answer  to  the  question,  '•  VVIicn  previously  to  Christ's  coming, 

tlid  the  Eo^yptians  cry  to  Jehovah  ?"  &.c. 
Isaiah  xxxv.  10,     "  The  ransom  of  the  Lord,"  &c.  examined 
Isaiah  xlii.   [2,]  51,  "He  shall  not  cry,"  &c.  "The  Lord  is  well 

pleased,"  examined         ......•• 

2  Cor.  V.  21  ;  Isaiah  liii.  examined 

Answer  to  the  question,  ''  Is  not  our  repentance  sufficienl  ?"  &c.  ib. 
Jer.  xxiii.  [5],  xxxi.  [^1,  3:3] ;  1  Cor.  i.  MO,  examined  .      60 

Ezek.  xxxiv.  23;  Dan.  ix.  2(;,  exammod         .         .         .  61 

Hosea  iii.  [5];  Joel  ii.  28  ;  Amos  ix.  [11],  noticed        ...     62 
Obadiah  ver.  21,  examined  ;  Micah  iv.  and  v.  noticed  62.  63 

Nahum  i.    15;  Hab.  [ii.  4,]  "The  just  shall  live  by  his   laith," 

compared  with  Rom.  i.  [17]  ;  Gal.  iii.  2,  [11  ?]  noticed         .         64 

Ha-rgai  ii.  [6,  7,  9],  examined »*• 

Zech.  iii.  8,  9,  vi.  12,  13  ;  Malachi  iii.  1,  noticed  .       65,  6(» 

Jesus  made  no  declaration  respecting  the  design  of  his  death     .     66 
Such  expressions  as  ''Jesus  came  to  give  himself  a  ransom  for 

many,'  explained 

Rom.  iii.  24,  "  Being  justified  freely,"   &c.  ch.  viii.  32,  15,  16, 

18,  referred  to 

Locke's  paraphrase  on  Rom.  iii.  24,  quoted         .... 

Locke's  note  on  the  word  "  Redemption"         .... 
Locke's  note  on  the  word  "  Mercy-seal"         .         .         .         . 
Reference   lo  a  few  texts  explaining  the   terms   "sacrifice," 

«' ransom,'*  "otlering,"  &c 71,72 

Of  a  two-fold  nature  in  Christ 

Allusion  lo  the  three-fold  nature  of  a  Hindoo  incarnation 

Solemn  denial  of  ridiculing  Christ's  intercession 

The  Editor's  assertion,  that  "  the    blood  of  no  mere  creature 

could  take  away  sin,"  noticed 

The  Editor's  assertion,   '*  As  to  the  appointment  of  Jehovah  by 

Jehovah,  and  his  atoning  for  sin,"  noticed 
Artruments  in  proof  of  the  finite  eflTects  of  Christ's  appearance 

on  earth,  adduced 

The  Israelites  punished  finitely  for  sins  committea   against  the 

infinite  God         ...«.".-• 
I  Chron.  xxi.  11  [12]  and  15;  Judges  xiii.  1,  referred  to 
Infinite  reward  for  a  good  act  performed  for  the  propitiation  of 

the  infinite  God 76,  77 

The  phrases  "  everlasting  fire,"  and  "  everlasting  punishments," 

explained  ;Gen.  xvii.  8,  xlix.  26;  Hab.  iii.  6,  referred  to         .    77 


V 


AGK 


67 

69 
ib. 
70 
71 


72 
ib. 
73 

ib. 

ib. 

ib. 

7*; 


) 


\> 


7« 
ib. 


ib. 


ClIAPTEil  111. 

inquiry  into  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 

The  term  Trinity  not  found  i„  the  Scriptures       '         '. 

Gen.  xlviii.  16,  "  The  an^el  which  redeemed  me  ;"  xxxi. 

13  am  the  God  of  Bethel;"  Exod.  iii.  2,  -In   a   flame 

of  fire,"  examined 

''if-Th    ';"'   '"'^^^'^    ''''  ^"^  ^^   ^^Vpt;*"    Gen.   xxii.    " 
I        '.  I       °"^''''"°'^'^^**^»'^  thy  son,"  examined         .         .        79 
Isaiah  xiu  9  ;  R.uh  iv.  14  ;  Nehem.  v.  8,  referred  to,       .         79,80 
An  adusion  to  a  three-fold  nature  of  (^hrist         .         .  80 

o^God/''''    '"'^""   '""     21.22;  Job    i.    6,    "The 'sons 
■Tudges  xiii.  k;  ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  16,  referred  to      '  '  ^h 

saiah  X.  4--7,  xxix.  1,  fl_3,] ;  Micah  iv.  13,  v.  1,  referred  to  82,83 
Exod.  „,.  14,    *  Thus  Shalt  thou  say,  I  am   that  I  am ;"    John 

vui.  24,  "  It  ye  believe  not  that  I  am,"  ver.  58,  examined      .     ih. 
Matthew    xxiv.  5,  "I    am    Christ,"  and   John   iv.   25,  26; ii. 

19—21,  ferred  to    .        .  84, 85 

Psalm  Ix.xxix.  27;  [1]  Chron.  xiv.  8,  xviii.  1—8,  referred  to  .  87 
[1]  Chron.  XX.  2;  2  Kings  v.  26,  27;  Exod.  xxiii.  21,  referred  to  89,  9(1 
Prophets  performing  miracles  sometimes  without  oral  addresses 

to  God  ;  John  xi.  41,  42,  referred  to 90 

The  phrase  "  To  trust  in  him,"  examined  .  .91 

Proverbs  xxxi.  11  ;  Isaiah  xiv.  32,  referred  to  .         .       ih. 

Jer.  xvii.  5,  explained H, 

Psalm   xxiv.  [1,2]  "The  earth  is  Jehovah's,"  &c.,  compared 

with  John  i.  3,  examino<l H, 

Hcb.  i.  2  ;  Eph.  iii.  9,  referred  to  ;  1  Cor.  x.  25, 26,  "  Whatsoev- 
er id  sold,"  <Scc.   compared  with  Psalm  xxiv.  1,  examined       92,  93 

Ilcb.  i.  2;  John  iii.  35,  referred  to 94 

1  Cor.  X.  22,  "  Do  we  provoke  the  Lord.="  &lc.  examined         .        ib. 

I  Kings  xix.  I0,referred  to 95 

Psalm  xxiv.  8,  compared  with  Eph.  iv.  8,  examined  .  .  ib. 
Psalm  Ixviii.  18,  referred  to;  Locke's  note  quoted  .  .  .90 
Psalm  x.xxvi.  1,  "O  Jehovah  thou   pieservest,"  &lc.   compared 

with  Col.  i.  17  ;  Heb- i.  3,  examined 97 

John  xvii.  2,  v.  30,  and  John  xiv.  24,  "  The  word  which  ye  hear," 

&c.  Matt,  xxviii.  18,  referred  to 99 

IVilm  xiv.  6,  as  quoted  in  Hcb.  i.  8,  "  Thy  throne,  O  God,"  <fcc. 
examined         •'•••••...       ?7> 


I 


310 

Page 

The  Editor's  substitution  of  the  term  "Jehovah"  for  "  God,"  no- 
ticed          il*' 

Direct  application  of  Psahn  xlv.  to  Solomon,  illustrated         .  10<> 

Psalm  cii.  25 — 27,  referred  to 101 

Heb.  i.  10—12,  "  Thou,  Lord,  in  the  beq^inning,"  &c.,  examined   ib. 

Deut.  xxxii.  10;  Isdiah  xlix.  IG;  Psalm  xlvii.  3;  Malt.  xxii. 
45,  referred   to •  .         .  102,  lOIt 

The  Editor's  substitution  of  the  term  "Jehovah"  for  "  Lord" 
noticed     ...........    t^« 

The  Editor's  endeavor  to  weaken  the  forre  of  the  evidence  re- 
specting the  changeable  nature  of  Christ         ....  104 

1  Cor.  XV.  24,  25,  and  28,  referred  to ib. 

Application  of  the  term  "  uhepherd,*'  examined         .         .         .    106 

Isaiah  Ixiii.  11;  Jer.  xxiii.  4,  '•  I  will  set  up  shephcrdi  over 
them,"  «fcc.,  referred  to  .......        ib. 

Ezek.  xxxiv.  23,  "  I  will  set  one  shepherd,"  &c.,  examined         .     tb. 

Eph.  iv.  18,  conjpared  with  Psalm  Ixviii.  18,  *'  Thou  hast  ascend- 
ed on  high,"  examined  ;   Ahjaoran,  cH.  i.  quoted       .  103,  109 

From  a  Jewish  book  of  prayers,  "Sabbath  Morning  Service," 
"  Jewish  Morning  Service  ;"  Ahpioran  ii.  5,  quoted         .         .   110 

Hosea  ii.  15—17,  19  ;  The  context  of  ver.    18,  referred  to  .  Ill,  112 

The  Editor's  attempt  to  invalidate  tlio  argument  founded  ou 
John  X.  34 11'3 

Figurative  application  of  the  terms  '*  The  sons  of  God,"  "The 
tirst-born  of  God."  &c.,  noticed tb. 

Luke  ii.  7,  21.  40,42,51,  52  ;  Matt.  xi.  19;  Mark  iii.5;  John  iv. 
6,  xii.  27 ,  xiii.  5,  21;  Luke  xxii.  44;  Mark  xiv.  34;  Matt, 
xxvii.  50;  Phi!,  ii.  8,  refened  to, 114 

The  commonly -received  doctrine  of  Christ's  two-fold  nature, 

noticed II*"* 

Moses  and  the  chiefs   of  Israel   termed    gods   and  men,   and 
equally  with  Jesus  said  to  have  performed  most  wonderful 
miracles         .         .         .         •         .         •         •         •         •         .110 

Terms,  phrases  or  circumstances  strictly  applicable  to  God  alone 
when  ascribed  to  created  beings,  to  be  interpreted  in  an  infe- 
rior sense         ..........     ib. 

The  argument  of  Moses  and  others  being  types  of  Christ,  no- 
ticed          t^- 

Exod.  XXV.  8 ;  Deut.  vii.  6,  x.  15,  xiv.  1,  referred  to  .  .117 
Deut.  X.  17,  John  xx.  17  ;  Psalm  xiv.  7,  referred  to         .         .  ib. 

The  context  of  ch.  xv.  [John  %.]  34,  referred  to  .  .  .118 
1  Cor.  X.  9,  "  Neither  let  us  tempt  Christ,"  exaniined  .  .  t6. 
The  Editor's  last  assertion  on  this  subject  examined  .     \VJ 


) 


1 


\ 


311 


Page 


Isaiah  ixiii.  5,  "Mine  own  arm;'^  and  Rev.  i.  8,  "I  am  Alpha 
and  Omega,"  examined 

Gen.  XXV.  30,  [Jcr.]  xlix.  7,  13,  8.9!  11,  referred  to         '        "      loj 
Inconsistency  of  ascr,b,„g  ,„  Jesus  the  foUow.ng  exp-'essions : 

I  w,ll  tread  them,"  "  Their  blood  shall  be  upon  mv  garment"  122 
lH.,ah  l,x.  L-i-I? ;  Dan.  vii.  9,  referred  to  '  ^        ,1   ^ 

Rev.  1. 8,  and  its  context,  examined  '        '  '   , 

Psalm  Ixxviii.  [13],  "He  divided  the  sea,"  noliced"        '        '  \f. 

P,.l»  xcv.  [6,  7]  "  For  Jehovah  is  a  great  God,"  examined '  « 
Examm^,on  of  John  x.  .'JO.  ■■  I  and  my   Father  are  one,"  defer 

red  ;  Heb.  m.  .3,  4,  noticed  ;  Verse  (i,  referred  to                ,85  ,2r 


SECTION'    SECO.TD. 


On  the  Prophets 

''lilei  ''    :* """'  ""'.  "'^';"'  "'  •"  ^''-  -•  2-'.  27,-30,  e..  '"^ 
Poalm  cxxx  7,  Ixxxv.  10 ;  Numb.  xvi.  46,  referred  to    '        ' 
1  John  IV.  8 ;  John  i.  1  ;  1  Cor.  i.  24,  30  ;  2  Cor   r   2l  •'  n    '. 

isa-:r:i  T'lo""'"-  -"■  :-^  =•  ^^-  ""'^  =  ^^'^^■^:^r^ 

Isaiah  VI  1,10  compared  with  John  xii.  4 1,  exau.ined 

The  context  of  ver.  41,  referred  to 

Rom.  xi.  7,  8 :  Isaiah  Ixiii.  17,  referred  to      '  .      "        '        ' 

Verse  41,  compared  with  John  viii.  56 

Deut  xxviii  28,  xxix.  4 ;  1  Km;s  xviii.  tn,  refe'rred  io      '        ' 

Mat,'"-  ^'  ;f  •"""•.  •  f^'"  "-"  -"--."  compared  with 
"""•  '•  *-%  -«■>,  examined 

The  term   '  shall  conceive,"  considered     '        '        '        '        ' 
Gen.  xvi.  11,  4,  5;  Jer.  xxxi.  8  ;   2  Sam.  xi.  5,  and  Isaiah  xxvi 
17 ;  Gen.  xxxviii.  24,  25,  referred  to 

I».i.h  vii.  16;  Mic.h  iv.  10;  Isaiah  xxiii.  12,  referred  to       ' 

.rT.rT'"^  •"'"""'"  ^"'"''^  *"""?  PO'-'-d  "fall  pow. 
er  .n  h.s  human  capacHy,  and  his  not  knowing  good  from  evil 
-n  thntv^  cnpacty ;  Luke  ii.  46-50,  referred  to  „. 

Matthew's  ipferencc  to  T«ni«K  «::   i/i    •    .     *         '  139,140 

I>r.  Campbell.  aTho'^yToted  '      '  '"  '"  ""''''  '""""''      "' 
Hosea  xi.  l,  3,   noticed  '        •        -  .     tb. 

I-iah  ix.  6,  ..  For  nnto  us  a  child  is  b^rn,"  examined  '      . '      .    \% 


127 
129 

ib. 
130 

rb. 
131 
132 
133 

ib. 
134 


135 

fb. 
136 


Page 

The  context  oftlie  versie  in  question,  coin])are(l  [with]  ti  Kings 

XV.  29,   &c.  xviii.  7,  &c.  referred  to         .         *         .  144 — 14G 
The  decision  left  to  the  public                           .         .         .         .147 
Ditference  between  "  to  be,"  and  "to  be  called,"  noticed         .       ih. 
The  phrases  "no  end,"  and    "forever,"    or   "  everlasting,"  ex- 
plained           148 

Verses  1,  2,  of  Isaiah  ix.   applied  in  an   accommodated  sense  to 
Jesus         .........  .  ih. 

Matt.  i.  23,  "  And  they  shall  call  his  name  Immannel,"  explained      ih. 
Christian  emperors  addressed  by  the  style   "  your   divinity,-' 

"  your  godship" 140 

Psalm  Ix.Kxix.  19,  examined  by  a  refei<^nce  to  its  context         .       150 
Isaiah  xxviii.  1(3,  compared  with  Isaiah  viii.  13;  1  Peter  ii.  7,  8, 

*' The  stone  which  the  builder.<:,"  &c.  examined         .   *     .         151 
A  proof  of  Christ's  changreable  nature         ....  153 

Isaiah  xl.  3,   "  Voice  of  him,"  &c.  and  Mai.  iii.   1,  examined         ib. 

Reference  to  Mark  i.  2,  3 ib. 

The  verse  in  question  in  the  original  Hebrew         .         .         .         155 

Luke  i.  69;  John  i.  29,  30,  referred  lo ib. 

Isaiah  xl.  10,  compared  with  Rev.  xxii.  12,  examined         .  ib. 

Acts  xvii.  31 ;  John  viii.  28;  xvii.  1,  2;  Ileb.  i.  8,  9,  shewing 
that  Jesus,  wh»;  thcr  as  man,  son  of  man,  or  son  of  God,  was  in- 
ferior to  the  Most  High,  referred  to  .  .  .  157,  158 
Isaiah  xliv.  6,  compared  with  Rev.  i.  8,  and  xxii.  13,  examined  159 
Joshua  V.  14  ;  Numb.  xxii.  31;  Dan.  ii.  4(>,  referred  to  .  160 
Rev.  iii.  14  ;  Col.  i.  15  ;  1  Cor.  xv.24,  referred  to  .  161,  162 
Prophets  and  apostles  represented  as  the  searchers  of  hearts  162 
Rev.  xxi.  5,  explained;  Rev.  xxii.  6 — 13,  noticed  .  .  163,164 
Phrases  in  Rev.  i.  1,  and  .xxii.  6,  compared  ....  166 
.lesus  calls  himself  a  servant  of  God,  addresses  Christians  as  his 

brethren,  &lc |(5g 

Several  questions  put  to  shew  the  inferioiiiy  of  the  Lamb  168,  169 
A  query  in  reply  to  one  of  the  many  insinuations  of  the  Editor's  170 
Isaiah  xlv.  23,  "Unto  me  every  knee  shall  bow,"  compared  with 

Rom.  xiv.  10 — 12,  examined {f,^ 

.lohn  iii.  29;  Eph.  v.  23,  compared  with  Isaiah  liv.  5,  examined  173 
Jer.  xxxiii.  16,  examined  ;  1  Cor.  xi.  3,  refeired  to         .  175,  17(j 

The  simple  term  "Jehovah"  exclusively  applied  to  God  .  177 
Jer.  V.  22,  examined  ••••....  178 
The  Editor's  position  tiiat  Jesus   "  exercised  absolute  dominion 

in  no  name  beside  his  own,"  examined         ....      179 
John  X.  25,  referred  to  ;  Jer.  X.  11,  examined         .         .         .  ih. 

llcb.  iv.  13,  examined .  jm 


\ 


SIS 


Page 


182 
183 

184 
185 

ih. 
ib. 


The  reason  for  the  difterent  expressions  used  by  God  to  the 
Prince  of  Tyrus,  and  to  Jesus,  explained        .... 
I  Cor.  iv.  5,  explained 

That  others  besides  Jesus  were  endued  with  the  power  of  know 

ing  the  state  of  the  heart,  shewn 

The  perishable  nature  of  Jesus  and  his  kingdom,  explained 
The  epithet  *'  Most  holy,"  applied  even  to  inanimate  things 
The  Editor's  remarks  on  Hosea  xi.  1,  noticed 

Hosea  iii.  5  ;  Acts  ii.  21  ;  1  Cor.  i.  2,  examined         .         .     186,  187 
Locke's  paraphrase  on  1  Cor.  i.  2,  and  his  note  on  Rom.  x   13,' 
^«oted ^  jgg 

Amos  iv.  13  J  Zech.  iii.  2,  and  ii.  8,  noticed        .  189 


CHAPTER  IV. 

On  the  Editor's  Replies  to  the  Arguments  contained  in  Chapter 
n.  of  the  Second  Appeal.  Christ's  possessing  all  power  as  a 
mediator  noticed 

Mercy  ascribed  to  the  Son,  and  justice  to  the  Father,  according 

to  the  Trinitarian  system,  noticed 
All  the  power  Jesus  enjoyed  was  given  unto  him  by  God 
Attributes  peculiar  to  God  never  ascribed  to  Jesus 
Jesus  was  like  the  sun,  an  instrument  m  the  hands  of  God 
Performing  miracles  and  enabling  others  to  perform  them,  were 

not  peculiar  to  Jesus 

"         •         •         •         .         .         . 

The  alleged  compound  nature  of  Jesus,  noticed 

The  terms  ''  forever"  and  "  everlasting"  explained 

Gen.  xvii.  8  ;  Jer.  vii.  7 ;  Dan.  vii.  18,  referred  to 

Phil.  n.  6,  "  Who  being  in  the  form  of  God,"  &c.  examined 

The  term   *'  first-born"  explained 

Exod.  iv.  22,  [Jer.]  xxxi.  9  ;  Psalm  Ixx'xix.  27,  referred  to  ' 

Kom.  viii.  29 ;  1  John  iv.  7,  referred  to 

Instances  whe.em  .lesus  himself  and  his  apostles  spoke  of  him 


192 

193 
195 
196 
197 

198 
201 
202 

.    ib, 
ib.' 

207 
.ib. 

208 


as  a  creature 
Jesus-s  alleged  two  natures  again  noticed 
The  phrase  "  from  the  beginning"  noticed 
The  Editor's  introducing  the  two-fold  nature  of  Christ 
Inconsistency  of  God's  emptying  himself  of  his  glory  and  offer- 

iDg  up  supplications  for  the  same,  to  himself 
John  xviii.  22,  referred  to;  Micah  v.  2,  exa.nined    '     •   '         * 
The  force  of  the  words  -  son"  and  "  ..wn  son"  noticed 
Psalm  Jxv.,.0;  1  Tim.  i.  2,  referred  to 

40  '        •        •        • 


ib. 
210 
211 
.  ib. 

212 
213 
216 
218 


814 

Page 

The  phrase  "only-begotten"  noticed 219 

John  X.  :3(),  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one,"  examined         .         .        220 
One's  callinfif  Ck>d  his  Father  cannot   amount  to  his  unity  in  na- 
ture with  the  Deity 22^ 

Gen.  ii.  24;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  19 ;  1  Cor.  x.  17,  referred  to  .  22:i 
Such  phrases  as  "  he  in  God,  and  God  in  him,"   "God  dwelleth 

in  hmi,  and  he  in  God,"  noticed (b. 

John  X.  3t),  containing  a  disavowal  of  deity  by  Christ,  explained  224 
John  X.  [:U— 3(1]  examined  by  its  context  ....  226 
Jesus  having  died  under  the  chartje  of  makinsr  himself  the  Son 

of  God,  noticed 228 

Heb.  [i.  8,]  "  Thy  throne,  O  God,"  originally  applied  to  Solomon, 

again  noticed         .         .         .         ; 23() 

The  phrase  *' forever"  again  noticed 231 

John  XX.  17,  ascribed  to  Jesus  in  his  hurtian  nature  .  .  ib. 
According  to  the  Fiditor,  one  part  of  the  same  sentence  spoken 

by  Jesus  in  his  divine,  and  another  in  his  human  capacity         232 
John  XX.  28,  '*  My  Lord  and  my  God,"  examined         .         .  ib. 
John  i.  1,  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  word,"  &:c.  examined          234 
Hindoo  Polytheism  compared  with  that  maintained  by  the  Ed- 
itor         242 

John  xvi.  30,  "  Now  aie  we  sure  that  thou  knoweat  all  things," 

examined ib. 

Paul,   "God  our   Saviour:"  1  Peter,   "The   righteousness  of 
God  ;"  Jude,  "To  the  only  wise,"  &c.  quoted  by  the  Editor, 

noticed         ....         • 243 

Perishable  nature  of  fictitious  gods,  noticed         .         .         .  244 

Answers  to  the  Editor's  queries         ......       ib. 

The  will  of  God  the  Father  sometimes  found  at  variance  with 
that  of  the  Son,  in  Matt,  xxviv  3i>,  and  Mark  xiv.  36         .  ib. 


CHAPTER    V. 

Remarks  on  the  Replies  to  the  Arguments  found  in  Chapter 

Third  of  the  Second  Appeal 247 

The  Editor's  First  Position  as  to  the  ubiquity  of  Jesus,  discuesed  ib. 
.Tohn  iii.  13,  "  No  man  hath  ascended  up,"  &.c.  examined  .  ib. 
Translation  of  this  verse  by  Dr.  Campbell,  quoted  .  .  2,57 
Parkburet's  authority  quoted ib. 

Matt,  xviii.  20,  "  For  where  two  or  three  are  gathered,"  &c. 

examined 259 

The  Editor's  qneries  answered ih. 


315 


\ 


Page 


'""Tknotw  ""'""f  *'°""''"  ■"  '"  '^"'^'^  "^"'"'"^  '»  himself 
»  knovrledge  and  an  incomprehensibility  of  nature  equal  to 
"Od,  discussed         . 

f  Jnh  ""'••  ^.'  " ^"  "'"  '"""^^^^  '^^  «°"''*  ^-  '— ined  * 
Th    ^."''  V  Z^"'^^  '^  '  ^^^  ^""P^^^^^  Version  quoted        . 

pendent  manner  the  power  of  forgiving  sin,  discussed         . 
Mark  11.  5  ;  Matt.  ix.  2,  examined  ;  Matt.  ix.  8,  referred  to 
Acts  V.  31,  xiii.  38,  referred  to        . 
The  Editor's  Fourth  Position,  respecting  alm'ighty  power  being 

claimed  by  Jesus,  discussed  .        .  ^ 

John  V.  19—36,  explained  ..."         * 

The  work  of  judging  men  is  not  peculiar  to  Jesus  ' 
John  V.  23,  separately  examined  .         .  *  ' 

Gal.  iv.  14  ;  Matt.  x.  25,  xix.  19,  referred  to  *        '        ' 

Gen.  iii.  22,  referred  to ;  Matt.  xx.  14,  noticed 
Matt.  XX.  23,  referred  to         .  '         '         * 

The  Editor's  Fifth  Position,  as  to  all  judgment  being  committed 

to  Jesus,  discussed        •         .         .        . 
Mark  xiii.  32,  referred  to         .  * 

The  EdHor's  Sixth  Position,  as  to  Jesus'  accepting  worship  due 

to  (jrod,  discussed 

•         "         . 

The  term  "  worship"  defined        .         . 

The  ancient  prophets'  receiving  worship  in  the  same  sense  'that 
Jesus  received  it        . 

*  *  *  •  • 

Invocation  by  Stephen,  explained 

The  pI""""!"^  r"'' '"'  T''"'' ""''  '•'"''^  '°  «<«»'  ■"^•'t.^ned  3^7 
The  Father,  h>s  Christ,  and  the  apostles,  acquitted  of  the  charge 

ot  encouraging  idolatry         .         .  ^ 

The  Editor'.  Seventh  Position,  as  to  the  Deity  of  the  Son.  and 

d"cus"er  *^*"""  ^'"^  ""  '"^"'""°°  of  baptism, 

Kxod.  xiv.  31  ;  [2]  Chron.  xx.  20 ;  Luke  iii.  Ifi^  referred  to 
The  terms  "  son"  and  "  servant"  equally  manifest  inferiority 
J  he  Editor's  queries  answered        .        .        , 
Matt,  xxviii.  20,  examined         .         .      '  * 


261 

ib. 

263 

264 

ib. 

266 

ib. 

ib. 
270 

ib. 
271 
272 
273 

ib 
274 

ih. 
275 

276 
ib. 


ib. 


278 
280 
282 
ib. 
283 


CHAPTER  VI* 

On  the  Holy  Spirit  and  other  subjects 

Brief  notice  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  Editor,  noticed 

Acts  X.  38  ;  Luke  iii.  16,  referred  to 


284 
ib. 

285 


316 

P\GE 

Such  expressions  as  '■  The  Holy  Spirit  will  teach  you,*'  &c.  no- 
ticed                 ,        .        .         286 

Acts  V.  3,  examined ,*j. 

Matt.  X.  40;  1  Cur.  viii.  12,  referred  to  ;  Acts  x.  20,  examined     287 
Isaiah  xlviii.  16,  with  its  context,  examined        •        .        .  388 

2  Cor.  xiii.  14,  examined        .        .        ,  :         .        .       291 

Zech.  xii.  10,  "  And  I  will  pour  upon  the  house  of  David,"  &c. 

examined         • 292 

Parkhurst's  authority  quoted 293 

Exod.  i.  1 ;  Gen.  xliv.  4,  iv.  1 ;  Deut.  vii.  8,  referred  to        .  294 

Zech.  xiii.  7,  "  Awake,  O  sword,  against  ray  shepherd,"  examined  ib. 
Rom.  ix.  5,  "God  blessed  forever,"  examined  ...  296 
1  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  Eph.  i.  17,  iv.  5,  (S,  referred  to  .  .  .  ^97 
1  John  V.  20,  "This  is  thfi  tFiie  God,"  exarainpd  .  .  .  ib. 
The  practice  of  the  primitive  Christians,  noticed        .        .  298 

Mosheims  authority  noticed         ...•••  tb. 

John  XX.  31,  quoted a. 

Authority  of  Locke  and  Newton  noticed         ....      299 

The  term  "  Antichrist"  examined 302 

The  doctrine  of  Polytheism  is  similar  to  that  of  a  plurality  of  per- 
sons         303 

The  Author's  expression  of  thanks  to  God  for  enjoying  Civil  and 
Religious  Libert  v.        • »7>. 


> 


i^* 


V, 


''*:5ii*iil>'' 


^39 
R14 


m 

o 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0032194285 


BOVJN 


»..&. 


m\ 


m 


